BUILDING AN IMAGE? 

CONSIDERING 
T H E MID-NINETEENTH CENTURY ENGLISH COUNTRY HOUSE 

AS AN A R C H I T E C T U R A L EXPRESSION 
OF MIDDLE CLASS VALUES 

by 

ANN MERLLNG 

B.Ed., The University of British Columbia, 1980 

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF 
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF 

MASTERS IN ADVANCED STUDIES IN ARCHITECTURE 

in 

THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES 

(School of Architecture) 

We accept tliis thesis as conforming 
to the required standard 

THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA 

November 1999 

© • Ann Merling, 1999 



In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced 

degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it 

freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive 

copying of this thesis f o r scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my 

department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or 

publication of this thesis for financial gain shall n o t be allowed w i t h o u t my written 

permission. 

Department of 

The University of British Columbia 
Vancouver, Canada 

DE-6 (2/88) 



11 

A B S T R A C T 

Mid-nineteenth century England saw an unprecedented building of country houses. 

This thesis addresses the issues of who was primarily responsible and why the resultant 

country houses appeared, in both architectural expression and spatial organization, so 

different from those of preceding periods. 

Evidence suggests that a significant number of nineteenth century country houses 

were financially underwritten by middle class owners. An examination of an exemplar 

country house, Bear Wood, posits that it was specifically designed and constructed to 

accommodate certain middle class values, a means by which this expanding and increasingly 

influential class could contribute towards establishing and legitimating its identity as distinct 

within the social order. Although a decisive defence cannot be offered against the generally 

inherent and tacit assumptions that the ambition of the middle class investor was to join the 

ranks of the established landed aristocracy, it is suggested that many of the innate precepts 

traditionally associated with the stewardship of a country house were used to underpin the 

identity of the nineteenth century middle class. 

This work reflects the axiom that, despite gradations of wealth and subsequent 

levels of rank, the unity and influence of the nineteenth century middle class lay in its 

common adherence to attitudes and values with which it became particularly associated. 

Whilst it is acknowledged that one country house cannot be considered a prototypal 

example to represent a heterogenous middle class, the significant wealth of the owner of 

Bear Wood did allow him to encapsulate, in architectural form, many of the tenets to which 

his class commonly subscribed. Evidence of the diversity with which that class represented 



I l l 

itself was extrapolated from Bear Wood, a diversity that ranged from a strident and acicular 

announcement of entrepreneurial acumen and success, to a succinct and subtle 

representation of domestic values and standards of propriety. 

That so many nineteenth century middle class tenets were to successfully permeate 

and influence the entire social order, to be emulated at both ends of the social scale, 

indicates the significance that can be attached to the architectural expression and the spatial 

organization of a country house like Bear Wood. 



iv 

T A B L E OF CONTENTS 

Abstract ii 

List of Figures v 

Acknowledgements vi 

Introduction 1 

Parti The Nineteenth Century Middle Class 
(1.1) Middle class identity & its representation 

in architectural form 8 

Part II The Approach to a Country House 
(2.1) The significance of the approach 

to the gates 15 
(2.2) The significance of the driveway 

approach to the main entrance 28 

Part ITJ The Exterior Architecture 
(3.1) The issue of an architectural style 39 
(3.2) The north entrance facade 44 
(3.3) The south garden front 53 

Part TV The Domestic Interior 
(4.1) Robert Kerr's consideration of the domestic 

interior & the primacy of spatial organization 62 
(4.2) Issues of domesticity, the family unit 

& domestic felicity 64 
(4.3) On the issue of spaciousness 71 
(4.4) On the issue of privacy 75 
(4.5) The issue of gender-specific space 86 
(4.6) On the issue of children within the 

domestic sphere 104 
(4.7) On the issue of efficient & 

productive work ethics 112 
(4.8) Issues of technology & scientific progress 111 
(4.9) Issues of health, sanitation & hygiene 122 
(4.10) v On the issue of middle class culture 130 

Conclusion 144 

Bibliography 153 
Appendix A Statement of accounts for Bear Wood Estate 163 
Appendix B Building accounts for Bear Wood House 164 



LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1 
The approach to Bear Wood estate 14a 

Figure 2 
Sindlesham Green estate village 14b 

Figure 3 
Bear Wood House: north entrance facade 44a 

Figure 4 
Bear Wood House: south garden front 53a 

Figure 5 
Floor plan of Bear Wood House: 

ground floor 61a 

Figure 6 
Floor plan of Bear Wood House: 

first floor 61b 

Figure 7 
Floor plan of Bear Wood House: 

second floor 61c 

Figure 8 
Principal staircase 91a 



vi 

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S 

My grateful thanks are extended to Dr. Deborah Weiner of the School of 

Architecture at UBC, my program mentor and thesis advisor. Her advice and valiant efforts 

at editing my submissions are greatly appreciated, together with her suggestions and the 

generous sharing of her professional expertise and knowledge. I would also like to 

acknowledge and thank Dr. Sherry McKay of the School of Architecture at UBC for her 

unfailing assistance and support during the production of this work. 

Dr. Dana Arnold kindly agreed to be my Outside Reader for this project. Dr. 

Arnold established the program of Country House Studies at the University of Leeds, 

England and is currently Professor of the History of Design at the University of 

Southampton, England. Her patience with awaiting my much-delayed submission of this 

thesis, together with her expert advice and suggestions are much appreciated. 

I would also like to acknowledge the assistance of Mr. David Greville Bowen as an 

invaluable resource for the many details and additional information that I required as this 

work progressed. His many trips to Bear Wood to research and reply to my unending 

requests have contributed greatly to the content of this thesis. 

Many others have contributed towards the completion of this work, not least my 

family and friends who have demonstrated remarkable support and patience. The 

professional input of others, such as Mr. Tim Knox, Architectural Historian for the National 

Trust, as well as the research staff at English Heritage, the RTBA Library and The Times 

have all made valuable contributions to this thesis. 



To these and to all the many others who have assisted me in so many ways, I extend 

my grateful thanks and appreciation. 

C'est finis! 



Vlll 

O f all the great things that the English have invented 
and made part of the glory of the national character, 
the most perfect, the most characteristic, the one they 

have mastered most completely in all its details, so 
that it has become a compendious illustration of their 
social genius and their manners, is the well-appointed, 

well-administered, well-filled country house. 

Henry James, "An English New Year", 1879 



1 

INTRODUCTION 

...Victorian country houses, because of their size, their complexity, their social 
background, the occasional masterpieces and many curiosities among them, and 
the mixture of piety, snobbery, romanticism, idealism and pretentiousness that 
contributed to their making, form a fascinating collection. Seldom can so much 
money and such exhaustive study have produced a group of buildings that, as 
private houses, became so soon and painfully obsolete.1 

Because of the construction of unprecedented numbers of country houses, mid-

nineteenth century England might be considered to have been the 'golden age' of country 

house building.2 Be these country houses now viewed, as suggested by Mark Girouard as 

'occasional ̂ masterpieces' or 'many curiosities', there is little doubt that they were large in 

both number and size and eclectic in distinctive architectural styles and spatial organization. 

The focus of this thesis will be to address the issues of who was primarily 

responsible for the construction of these unprecedented numbers of mid-nineteenth century 

country houses and why they appeared, both in architectural style and spatial organization, 

to have been so different from those of preceding periods. Referencing both architectural 

expression and spatial design, attention will be given to what had been retained, what was 

1 Girouard, The Victorian Country House (1979): v. 
2 For the purpose of this thesis, the mid-nineteenth century refers to the years circa 1850-1880. By mid-
century, the nations was at the cusp of its vigour and economic growth before the depression of the 1880s 
had begun to take effect. Altick in Victorian People & Ideas (1973) considers these years to have been the 
High Victorian Era that ended in the mid 1870s: 14. 
'Well over 1,000, perhaps as many as 2,000 country houses were built between 1835 & 1914'. Franklin, 
The Gentleman's Country House & Its Plan (1981): 1. F.M.L. Thompson suggests that a 'reasonable guess' 
for the standing stock of houses in 1830 was 3000 and that 'some 500 country houses were either built or 
substantially remodelled between 1835 and 1889. The Rise of Respectable Society (1988): 154 &155. 
The effects of the agricultural depression that took root at the beginning of the 1880s did not entirely halt 
the construction of country houses, although the numbers declined. (This does not apply to 'houses in the 
country' the numbers of which remained high until World War I). The last great country house to be built 
was Castle Drago, commissioned from architect Edwin Lutyens by Julius Drew, founder of the Home & 
Colonial grocery stores. Building eventually ceased in 1930, although the house was never completed to the 
original plan. 



2 

innovative and new and how these innovations and changes might be interpreted within the 

social context of contemporary nineteenth century England. 

So as to allow for a more equitable comparison with country houses from previous 

centuries, the definition applied to the mid-nineteenth century houses considered will be 

those situated on an estate that could provide sufficient financial support, rather than being 

a 'house in the country' wherein the operation of the latter required support with financial 

input from sources other than its estate. Thus, the mid-nineteenth century country houses 

studied were the principle residence of the owner, functioned as the family seat and were at 

the centre of a self-supporting, financially viable estate.3 

In a departure from the tradition of previous centuries, when the building of country 

houses had primarily been undertaken by the aristocratic landowning classes, a significant 

number of those built in the nineteenth century house belonged to new families.4 Historian 

F.M.L. Thompson estimates that the number underwritten by financial investments made by 

wealthy members of a rapidly expanding and increasingly influential middle class was at 

3 Franklin in The Gentleman's Country House (1981): Chapter 2 provides information on the size and 
financial viability of 19th. century estates. 
Although the houses considered in this study were all situated on financially viable estates, unlike those of 
previous centuries, a self-sustaining estate was not essential for many 19th. century country houses. Income 
was often supplemented by the mineral rights to many estates (as in the case, for example, of Brodsworth 
Hall, Yorkshire, rebuilt between 1861 and 1863 from the profits of coal mined on the estate). For the long-
established landowners, increased industrialization allowed for opportunities to diversify financial assets 
into such areas as urban and industrial developments (as in the case, for instance, of the Dukes of 
Westminster and Devonshire who developed urban areas in London and Eastbourne, respectively). In 
addition there was the growing tendency to invest in foreign stocks (as in the case, for example, of the Duke 
of Bedford who invested (and subsequentiy lost) heavily in Russian railways). Marry 19th. century middle 
class owners did not actually depend on the financial viability of their estates, for they had significant 
incomes derived from entrepreneurial activities outside of their estates. 
4 Franklin: The Gentleman's Country House (1981): 25. 
Paul Langford in Public Life & the Propertied Englishman (1991) refers to an emerging 18th. century 
middle class, but he defines that of the 19th. century as being entrepreneurial: 14. 
The fact that the majority of houses were being built by wealthy middle class owners does not mean that the 
aristocratic landed gentry were idle, but their focus was largely on the remodelling of ancestral homes, 
rather than on the construction of new ones. For example, the Lyttons remodelled Knebworth in the 1850s, 
the Bute family started extensive remodelling at Cardiff Castie in 1865, the Beaumonts started work on 
Carlton Towers in the 1870s. 



least half of the total.5 That these middle class owners should make considerable 

investments in the commission and construction of such exceptional numbers of houses 

leads to an examination of the significance that they evidently attached to the ownership of a 

country house and its attendant estate. It cannot be denied that many country houses 

belonging to middle class owners would have been built to rival or emulate either existing 

houses belonging to the established landed gentry, or those being constructed by other 

members of the middle class who had been equally successful in their entrepreneurial 

achievements. Was it, then, that these middle class owners wanted, through the medium of 

their country houses, to achieve the social standing traditionally associated with aristocratic 

ownership, or was there an alternative objective? For example, were these mid-nineteenth 

century houses specifically designed and constructed to accommodate any specific social 

tenets by which their middle class owners wished to be identified? If this was the case, 

what, then, were these tenets that became associated with middle class identity and how can 

they be interpreted through the architectural medium of a country house? Is there evidence 

that there was a specific and deliberate intent on the part of the middle class owners to use 

their country houses as a means by which certain of their class ideologies could be 

established and sustained, so to contribute towards legitimating their identity as a distinct 

social class, separate and apart from the aristocratic or the working classes? 

Whilst the research for this study entailed considering a wide representative 

selection of mid-nineteenth century country houses built by owners and architects to whom 

middle class status can be appropriated, the primary focus is on the architecture and the 

spatial organization of one in particular.6 Bear Wood built between 1865 and 1874 on an 

5 Thompson, The Rise of Respectable Society (1988): 155. 
6 A detailed discussion of middle class status will be presented later in the text. 



4 

estate at Sindlesham, near Wokingham in Berkshire will be used as the exemplar in order to 

address the issues raised. Whilst Bear Wood can be considered an extreme, rather than a 

typical, expression of middle class values, the financial resources of the owner meant that 

he could afford to fully express, in architectural form, the tenets to which he subscribed. 

Hence, Bear Wood provides a particularly readable resource from which to identify many of 

the values by which the nineteenth century middle class can be identified. 

Both the owner, John Walter III and the architect, Robert Kerr, belonged to the 

middle class.7 Both were influential. John Walter, as principal proprietor of the Times, a 

newspaper of'enormous prestige' with not only the biggest circulation, but one that 'spoke 

for the middle class', was in a position to exert considerable influence on his readers.8 His 

was a position in which he was respected, a suggestion supported by the fact that he was 

several times offered the honour of a peerage.9 Robert Kerr, too, was in a position to exert 

considerable influence. In his professional capacity, he was the first president of the 

Architectural Association, Professor of the Arts of Construction, Kings College, London 

and, for forty two years, District Surveyor for St. James's, Westminster.10 In addition, he 

was author of several literary works, perhaps the most influential of which was The 

7 John Walter III (1818-1894) Robert Kerr (1823-1904). 
8 That the 'Times spoke for the middle classes', is an assumption made by Girouard possibly based on the 
fact that it was considered to be a Tory-biased newspaper, "Bear Wood, Berkshire" Country Life, October 
17, 1968: 965. There is also the presumption that (particularly the middle and upper ranks of the middle 
class) were pro-Tory, whereas the aristocracy were traditionally presumed to be pro-Whig. The influence of 
the paper was probably enhanced by the fact that 'The Times emerged from the (Crimean) war with 
enormous prestige': 966. 
In the latter years of the century, advances in technology meant that the process of printing became cheaper. 
The Times lost ground to the penny-press publications, a fact that substantially reduced Walter's income 
and that would, ultimately, contribute to the sale of his estate, Bear Wood. 
The status that had been applied in the mid-19th. century to the profession of architecture infers that Kerr, 
too, would have been considered middle class. 
9 The Times, "Death of Mr Walter", Monday, November 5, 1894. Kerr declined the offer of a peerage. 
10 Directory oj'British Architects 1834-1900: 524. 



5 

Gentleman'sHouse.'! His obituary noted that, in both his writing and in his oratory, Ken-

was in the 'possession of a gift [that was] fluent and effective, that he was a man of 'energy 

and vigour'.12 Hence, by the media of both his professional position and his publications, 

he was in a position to exert considerable influence, not only on his professional peers, but 

also on potential middle class owners of country houses for whom The Gentleman's House, 

in particular, appeared to be a definitive treatise.13 For both his architectural peers and 

potential country house owners, the book provided detailed and specific parameters within 

which both architect and 'English Gentlemen' were offered detailed instruction and advice 

on the appropriate architectural design, as well as the spatial organization for their houses.14 

As the contemporary architect, J.J. Stevenson noted: 

On the subject of planning houses, 'The English Gentleman's House', 
by Professor Kerr, contains about all that need by known. The book is 
large and would bear condensation.15 

And, as if to underscore the influence that a book such as Kerr's would have had on both 

architects and clients, Stevenson wrote of his own literary works, 'architects have 

frequently told me that they wished they had such a book as this which they could put into 

the hands of their employers...'16 

1 1 Robert Kerr (January 17, 1823-October 21, 1904) born, educated and trained in Aberdeen. FRIBA 
1857. President A A 1847-1878, District Surveyor for St. James', London 1862-1902. Published Newleqfe 
Discourses on the Fine Art of Architecture (1846) The Consulting Architect (1886) The History of 
Architecture in all Countries (1891-1899). Biographical notes, Directory of British Architects 1834-1900: 
24. 
12 The Builder, "The Late Professor Kerr", October 29, 1904: 435. 
1 3 As noted in Part I (1.1), it was acknowledged that Walter gave Kerr the commission for Bear Wood 
based on The Gentleman's House. 
1 4 Kerr first published The Gentleman's House; or, How to Plan English Residences from the Parsonage to 
the Palace; with Tables of Accommodation and Cost, and a Series of Selected Plans in 1864. By 1865, the 
book had been revised. The second edition included a Supplement on Works of Alteration, and Additional 
Plates. 
1 5 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. I (1880): 8. Fellow of the Royal Institute of British Architects. 
1 6 Ibid.: 2. 



However influential the work of Kerr might have been, it is suggested by the 

architectural historian, Nickolaus Pevsner that Kerr's 'nimble mind' might have 'turned 

over' 'thoughts similar to Burgess' and Whites' and even more of Aitchison's and 

Harris's'.1 7 If this was so, then it might be assumed that the advice and suggestions offered 

by Kerr reflected those of a wider range of architectural thought than those of the author 

alone and that his literary works can be considered a codification of both past and present 

notions. 

In addition to citing John Walter and Robert Kerr as influential members of the 

middle class, particular reference will be made to the works of J.J. Stevenson; House 

Architecture, Volumes I and II were published in 1880, although Stevenson notes that he 

had begun his work 'ten years ago during an interval in the practices of my profession'.18 

Stevenson's works are considered to be a particularly important resource for the purposes 

of this thesis, for he sometimes concurs with and, thus adds credence to, the advice given by 

Kerr in 1865 in The Gentleman's House. However, presuming that Kerr's work was 

directed at middle class readers, the fact that Stevenson did not completely concur with 

Kerr's advocations elucidates the diverse ways in which an expanding, increasingly 

influential, but far from homogenous, nineteenth century middle class represented itself. 

Reference will also be made to the contemporary works of John Ruskin, particularly 

as his influence spanned the period on which this thesis is focused. A pre-eminent 

nineteenth century philosopher and thinker, architect, artist, critic and prolific writer John 

Ruskin, with his affluent, Evangelical Christian, middle class background, reflected many of 

1 7 Pevsner, Some Architectural Writers of the Nineteenth Century (1972): 233. 
1 8 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7(1880): Preface, v. It can be presumed that Stevenson had been 
influential in the field of architecture for a decade or more before his books went to print. 



the values and attitudes on which middle class ethos was based and by which the class has 

been subsequently identified.19 As historian, Kristine Garrigan notes, the 'formidable 

reputation' of Ruskin makes it 'difficult...to reevaluate either Victorian art or architecture 

without studying Ruskin's imposing works carefully' in that 'no other author has ever been 

more thoroughly identified with the aesthetic currents of his time'.20 

It will be suggested that certain of the ideologies to which both owner and architect 

of Bear Wood, as representatives of the middle class, apparently subscribed were evident in 

the architecture and spatial design of a mid-nineteenth century country house. That these 

middle class tenets were to successfully permeate and influence the entire social order and 

were, subsequently, to be emulated at both ends of the social scale, indicates the 

significance that can be attached to a country house like Bear Wood.2 1 

Assumptions will be drawn from examining the siting, the architecture and the plan 

of Bear Wood. Evidence will be sought that certain values associated with the social status 

of both owner and architect had a very close relationship with the way in which the 

approach to the house was planned, as well as with the architectural expressions evident in 

its design and the way in which middle class domestic space was intended to function. By 

such means, credence can be given to the supposition that a mid-nineteenth century country 

house, such as the exemplar Bear Wood, was a medium by which certain middle class 

values could be manifested and maintained, so to enable the class to build an identity by 

which it would be recognized as a distinct and legitimate in the social order. 

1 9 Pevsner, Some Architectural Writers of the Nineteenth Century (1972) devotes Chapter X V to the 
influence of Ruskin. 
2 0 Garrigan, Ruskin on Architecture (1973): xi. 
2 1 Walter Creese in The Search for the Environment (1966) states that it was 'the eternal ambition of the 
working class to attain the broad middle class plateau of respectability', an ambition inherent in both the 
19th. and the 20th. centuries: 335. 



8 

PART I 

(1.1) Middle class identity and its representation in architectural form 

On June 6, 1868, an article in The Builder reported, in part: 

A very interesting event came off on Saturday last. At Bearwood, in 
Berkshire... a fine house is being erected from the designs of Professor Kerr, 
for Mr. John Walter...The building being finished externally, or nearly so, 

. Mr. Walter on that day entertained at dinner the whole of the workmen 
who are engaged upon it, some 380 in number...In proposing the health 
of the architect, Mr. Walter said that it was from perusal of Mr. Kerr's 
book, "The Gentleman's House," he had been led to seek that 
gentleman's assistance. 

An analysis of a country house such as Bear Wood, designed by a middle class 

architect for a middle class owner, demonstrates the diverse ways in which many of the 

tenets associated with their class by the mid-nineteenth century were represented in both its 

architectural expression and its spatial organization. 

This diversity of representation is suggested, for example, by the maxims of the 

architect of Bear Wood, Robert Kerr. On the one hand, he instructed readers of The 

Gentleman's House that 'it must be looked upon as a rule that an English gentleman will 

desire to avoid obtrusiveness even at the sacrifice of a good deal of that importance which 

properly belongs to the rank, wealth, education and character of his class'.22 This advice 

evidently meshed well with the persona of Kerr's patron. In the eulogy The Times paid to 

John Walter at the time of his death, he was described as having been a man of 'refined 

Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 51. 



taste', a person o f principles', o f judgement', o f rare sagacity and insight', o f sincerity of 

purpose'.23 

On the other hand, to such perceptions of restraint, refinement and integrity must be 

compared a vocabulary that has also been used to formulate an identity for the Victorian 

middle class. Kerr, himself, appeared to contradict his maxims for unobtrusiveness and 

restraint by incorporating terminology such as 'authority, vigour, vivacity, dignity and 

importance' into his architectural dogma.24 In the present century, the architectural 

historian, Mark Girouard not only considers such words pertinent, but he has supplemented 

them with his own 'power, magnificence and display'.25 

Such a vocabulary, be it applied to architecture or to the identity of an individual, 

suggests a nineteenth century middle class that apparently represented itself in diverse ways. 

Support for the hypothesis is upheld by the literary critic, Terry Eagleton who theorizes 

that: 

the term'ideology'is just a convenient way of categorizing under 
a single heading a whole lot of things we do with signs. The phrase 
'bourgeoisie ideology', for example, is simply shorthand for an 
immense range of discourses scattered in time and space.26 

The many ways in which the middle class manifested its ideologies was an indication 

that it was a far from homogeneous group.27 As a class, it was both complex and disparate 

23 "Death of Mr. Walter", Times, Monday, November 5, 1894. 
2 4 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865) 
2 5 Girouard, "Bear Wood, Berkshire, I & II", Country Life, October 17 & 24, 1968. 
Girouard is cited as a reference primarily because there appears to be little extant documentation to indicate 
that any significant research has been undertaken on the architectural history of Bear Wood, apart from that 
published by Girouard. Much of the content of the Country Life articles cited later appears under 
Girouard's authorship in The Victorian Country House (1971, revised 1979). 
The original name of the estate was documented as Bear Wood, but was used interchangeably in the 19th. 
century references as Bearwood (see The Builder). 
2 6 Eagleton, Ideology: an Introduction (1991): 193. 
2 7 The first requisite of middle class status was an income above a certain minimum. The figure of S300 
per annum was frequently considered the minimum for the normal range of middle class comfort. However, 



10 

in a society that was becoming increasingly pluralistic. The middle class was primarily 

stratified by levels determined by the degree and the source of income, as well as by 

education, religious affiliation and standards of domestic accommodation.28 Nevertheless, 

those who claimed middle class status, despite their economic or religious diversity, 

appeared bound by a commitment to adhere to the imperatives of a common moral code. 

Theirs was a code based primarily on the Malthusian concept that man would attain his full 

stature as a rational, responsible being if he embraced moral restraint. At the same time, 

evidence of middle class entrepreneurial success was displayed in often ostentatious material 

form as a means by which the rewards for the Puritan-Evangelical ethics of hard work could 

be publicly demonstrated.29 In the course of the nineteenth century, however, despite the 

range of economic and social levels that delineated middle class status, a shared adherence 

to a code of ethics resulted in a doctrine that was to unite its members with a common 

identity. 

the lower strata had incomes of S150-S200 per annum, with some clerks and teachers earning as little as S60. 
Harrison, Early Victorian Britain (1979): 106-107. 
Sheeran, Brass Castles (1993) adopts the criterion used by historian W.D. Rubinstein that an 'affluent 
gentleman' would be worth 85,000^810,000. The 'new rich' of 'superior wealth' were worth 8100,000 -
5150,000. There were also middle class millionaires, Ibid: 8. 
An important concept was that the income of a middle class family was derived from one wage earner (the 
male head of the family) whereas the income of a working class family came from several sources of wages 
from both male and female family members. For examples of working class incomes, see Sheeran: 11-12. 
2 8 Distinctions within the middle class are discussed by Sheeran, Brass Castles (1993): 20. 
Rubinstein inMen of Property (1991) posits that religious affiliation and education were the most important 
differences between what he terms the 'two middle classes': 620-621. The middle and upper stratas of the 
middle class were generally presumed to be predominantly affiliated with the Anglican church, those from 
the lower stratas, with the Dissenting and Evangelical sects. 
Rubinstein also argues that there was a distinct geographical distinction with middle class wealth, with that 
derived from commerce and finance focused on the Home Counties and London, that derived from industry 
and manufacturing focused on the Midlands and the north of England. 
2 9 Despite a presumed affiliation with Anglican religious ritual, the middle and upper stratas of the middle 
class believed that Evangelical tenets of hard work brought rewards, a belief that formed part of the 
common ideologies to which its members subscribed. 



11 

Social historians, Leonore Davidoff and Catherine Hall consider that an adherence 

to the shared ideologies of the middle class emerged from the crises of the turbulent decades 

of the early nineteenth century.30 Historian Robert Stewart concurs with this, in that the 

emerging consciousness of class was an indication of the tensions and conflicts that had 

developed among the 'old interests' with, for example, the ongoing political ascendancy of 

the Tories.31 At the same time, the general usage of the language of class, combined with 

the emergence of an increasingly influential middle class became, according to J.F.C. 

Harrison, 'entangled with political struggle and theories of social change'.32 The inherent 

natural order of things in which the aristocracy, traditionally attributed with confidence, 

experience and expertise, were expected to govern was being undermined. There was an 

awareness that the ongoing revolutions in France could be repeated in Britain. Combined 

with this were such as the Swing Riots in 1815 and 1830, together with the Peterloo 

Massacre of 1819, indications of an incipient radicalism festering among the lower orders. 

By 1838, the Chartist Movement that had sought democratic and social change had 

formalized its principles for reform in the Peoples' Charter.33 In an effort to counter such 

signs of unrest among the proletariat, Lord Grey, leader of the Whigs, had introduced the 

first Reform Act in 1832, the intention of which was to 'associate the middle with the higher 

orders of society'.34 Combined with the passage of the Poor Laws, the first of which was 

introduced in 1834, the Act was intended to unite the middle with the upper classes to form 

a powerful force against the potential of revolution. The tactic was to 'strangle the working 

3 0 Davidoff & Hall, Family Fortunes (1987): 18. 
3 1 Stewart, Party & Politics (1989): 13. 
3 2 Harrison, Early Victorian Britain (1979): 31. . 
3 3 Despite the Peoples' Charter, agitation from the Chartist Movement continued over the next decade or 
so. 
34 Thompson, The Rise of Respectable Society (1988): 16. 



12 

men's ambitions' by way of the enfranchisement and, consequently, invest a large 

percentage of the male middle class population with political empowerment.35 Hence, the 

government of Lord Grey had provided the middle class with a powerful and legitimate 

means by which its members could voice the beliefs of their own class. 

An existence, separate and specific from either the aristocratic or lower classes, 

fuelled the aspirations of the middle class to imprint its identity on the social order, 

ambitions that can be seen as concurrent with similar national ambitions in a global context. 

A national euphoria, grounded on the defeat of Britain's long-standing enemy, the French at 

Waterloo in 1812, had laid a foundation on which the social constructs of the century were 

to evolve. The wish to create an orderly, disciplined, regulated and supervised society, the 

somewhat hegemonic mission to spread beliefs of freedom and ideals of the 'true religion', 

reflected aspirations that were both national and middle class. With the accession of 

Victoria in 1837, Britain had embarked on a period of peace and prosperity with ongoing 

economic growth, generated by rapid advances in technology and industrial developments. 

This is affirmed by F.M.L. Thompson, who is of the opinion that, by 1830, the Industrial 

Revolution was over and the nation was 'at least half-way through its drive to maturity, the 

maturity of a modern, fully industrialized economy'.36 

By mid-century, the middle class had coalesced around shared ideologies. To 

theorists, Antony Easthope and Kate Hall such a common ideology implies a class structure 

3 5 Stewart, Party & Politics (1989): 13. Franchise was originally granted to male householders occupying 
premises with a minimum revenue of S20 per annum. This was later reduced to S10 per annum, which 
meant that about 20% of the adult male population was enfranchised. By 1884, all male householders over 
the age of 21 had the vote. The fact that property was made a criterion for franchise contributed to the 
association of property with a man's worth. 
3 6 Thompson, The Rise of Respectable Society (1988): 22. 



13 

insofar as it is social and collective. They summarize the concept in terms of Marx and 

Engels who 

developed an account of ideology in terms of 'economic base' and 'ideological 
superstructure'. If a person's class position is determined by his or her economic 
position in relation to the mode of production, then this individual will share an 
ideology representing the economic interests of the class they belong to.3 7 

Against a backdrop of both growing material prosperity and representation, the middle class 

became increasingly anxious to express an identity distinct from those above and below 

them in the social order. This set them apart, in particular, from the long-established landed 

aristocracy who, it was perceived, likely would have inherited many of the propensities of 

their 'profligate patrician, eighteenth century ancestors'.38 As Kerr noted in his review of 

the direction that nineteenth century architecture had taken, the 'old philistinism of the 

Georges' had been 'vanquished'.39 Under the rubric of a 'growing desire for independence 

from the clientage of landed wealth and power', a middle class owner like John Walter 

could, through the medium of his country estate and its house, not only implement middle 

class ideals, but also help identify the values to which he subscribed as being distinct from 

Easthope & McGowan, A Critical and Cultural Theory Reader\\991): 42. 
3 8 The 'moral restraint' adhered to by the 19th. century middle class contrasted with Cannadine's 
perception of the 18th. century 'profligate patrician', who left an inheritance of 'widespread financial 
embarrassment and heavy indebtedness, the result of heavy and accumulated family charges, electoral 
extravagance, and the expense of house building'. The Decline & Fall of the British Aristocracy (1990): 
37. 
In turn, the aristocracy distanced themselves from even the wealthiest middle class on the assumption that 
most of the wealth of the latter was derived from trade, considered a 'vulgar' means of acquiring money, 
'...the number of aristocrats directly concerned with industry or manufacturing, apart from membership on 
boards of companies exploiting minerals on their own land, was probably n i l ' . Rubinstein, The Victorian 
Middle Classes (1977): 621. The same association of vulgarity was not applied to commerce or the 
professions. With the system of primogeniture inheritance in place, many of the younger sons of the 
aristocracy earned their living in such fields. 
39 "English Architecture Thirty Years Hence ". A speech delivered by Kerr on Friday, May 9, 1884 at the 
sixth and final Meeting of the General Conference of Architects held in London from 5 to 9 May. 
Published in Trans. R.I.B.A., XXXIV, 1883-4. Reprinted in Pevsner, Some Architectural Writers of the 
Nineteenth Century (1972): 291-314. 



14 

those of the aristocratic, or even the working classes.40 That the middle class wished to be 

regarded as a distinctive and separate class was a position bolstered by the expanding 

number claiming such status.41 

A study of a country house such as Bear Wood indicates that it served as a 

representation of an image of the middle class transcribed into architectural form. Built in 

the middle of the nineteenth century, Bear Wood inherited significant historical precedents. 

These included an understanding of its position as the fulcrum of power at the centre of a 

landed estate: further, that the country house was a source of influence and patronage, the 

locus of an authoritative, paternalistic community in which contemporary concepts of social 

management and political control could be exercised. Under the aegis of both earlier and 

nineteenth century values, the very existence of a country house could be seen to represent 

economic achievement, the identity of the owner and status for the family. It also implied a 

sense of stability and permanence to the family line and resonance to the family name. Its 

size, its placement within the estate and its architectural style can be interpreted as an 

indication of the temporal power, as well as the wealth and the individual tastes of its 

owner. 

4 0 Davidoff & Hall, Family Fortunes (1987): 18. 
Hall suggests that the ambition of the middle class to establish a separate identity was abetted by the 
working class who, although adopting many middle class ideologies, did not 'adopt them wholesale' and, 
thus, 'demonstrated [their] independence from middle-class meanings of the term and the creation of a 
separate and class-specific concept'. White, Male & Middle Class (1992): 144. 
4 1 Hall, White, Male & Middle Class (1992) estimates that, by the mid nineteenth century, 25% of the 
population claimed middle class status: 157. 



14a 



1 4 b 
i 



15 

PART n 

(2.1) The significance of the approach to the gates of a country house 

It would appear that a systematic analysis of the approach to a nineteenth century 

country house, such as Bear Wood, elucidates the diverse and seemingly contradictory ways 

in which the middle class represented itself On the one hand, for example, there would be 

evidence of moral restraint, on the other, aggressive representations of self-aggrandizement. 

There would be the representation of refined of taste alongside strident idioms of pomp and 

splendour. There was the contrast of an adherence to the tenets of privacy and domestic 

felicity, coupled with a public expression of civic duty that inferred ambitions for social 

recognition. 

A country estate, particularly when belonging to a middle class owner, provided 

evidence of accumulated wealth, either acquired, or inherited, but sustained as a result of 

entrepreneurial acumen and success. However, evidence suggests that such wealth was 

often intended to be mitigated by demonstrations of a philanthropic and moral conscience. 

Generally undertaken in the name of responsibility, that is a civic duty to society, such 

demonstrations served to establish a perception of middle class values that was intended to 

set the nineteenth century country house owner apart from its eighteenth century 

predecessor.42 

4 2 This was both confirmed and affirmed in literary sources. For example, Charlotte Mary Yonge had 
published The Daisy Chain in 1856, at the centre of which were philanthropic deeds. Just over 20 years 
later, in 1879, Henry James wrote of the philanthropic deed of a country house owner in "An English New 
Year". 



16 . 

In the case of the Walter family, a philanthropic conscience was made very public by 

the conspicuous construction of, for instance, churches.43 In 1846, approximately twenty 

years before John Walter III commissioned Bear Wood, his father, John Walter II, had built 

the church of St. Catherine's at Sindlesham. This was later to form part of the estate village 

built concurrently with Bear Wood house in 1865.44 In 1864, John Walter III continued his 

father's philanthropic gesture when he endowed the construction of St. Paul's in the nearby 

town of Wokingham.45 He later built an adjacent rectory and, at the end of the century, he 

and his heir, Arthur, undertook to build St. Paul's Elementary School, Parish Room and 

Clock Tower.46 That John Walter III wished to be perceived as having a philanthropic 

conscience was substantiated by a statement made in The Builder at a ceremony to mark the 

completion of the exterior of Bear Wood house. At that time, Walter in his 'felicitous 

addresses...expressed with emphasis the hope that the home there being formed would 

never become the seat of merely selfish enjoyment, but would long remain a centre of kindly 

hospitality and social sympathy'.47 

The Bear Wood estate village of Sindlesham Green, like many earlier estate villages, 

was purpose-built, rather than having evolved organically over a period of time.48 The 

location of a village adjacent to the approach of an estate was not new, but the existence of 

earlier villages outside the boundaries of the estate was generally the result of the gradual, 

4 3 In addition to the construction of churches, the owners of estates, as well as wealthy urban residents, 
frequently undertook the restoration of existing churches. 
4 4 John Walter II (1776-1847) son of the founder of The Times. 
Both churches practiced the Anglican ritual. 
4 5 In the opinion of Mark Girouard, this was to 'ease his conscience'. The Victorian Country House 
(1979): 121. 
4 6 Lea, Wokingham, A Pictorial History (1990): 5. 
47 The Builder, "Bearwood", June 6, 1868. 
4 8 Purpose-built estate villages were 'closed' villages under the control of the landowner, whereas the 
organic growth of 'open' villages was due to the vagaries of demographics. 



17 

but consistent, enclosure of land that had been taking place since the fifteenth century. The 

biggest transformation of the rural landscape had taken place between 1755 and 1779 under 

Parliamentary Acts that had rapidly accelerated the processes of enclosure and engrossment, 

as well as the emparkment that had been ongoing for several centuries.49 Under the aegis 

of more efficient and lucrative agricultural methods, these processes had significantly 

increased the size of country estates. Eighteenth century concerns for the aesthetic appeal 

of a landscaped park adjacent to the house significantly contributed to estate villages being 

relocated outside park boundaries and, most importantly, out of sight of the house.50 They 

were displacements that fractured the traditional and ancient system whereby landowners 

and tenants had lived in close proximity. They were also indicative of the increasing 

separation of family from servants and of the incipient separation of the public from the 

private realms in domestic living, actions at were to later form the foundation on which the 

social tenets adhered to by the nineteenth century middle class were constructed.51 

By its location at the approach to the Bear Wood estate where it was 'likely to catch 

the eye of visitors',52 the nineteenth century village of Sindlesham Green echoed the same 

intentions of similarly placed villages of the previous century in that its siting provided an 

impressive and emphatic public introduction to the significance of the owner. The east side 

4 9 Between these years, 1,124 Acts of Enclosure were passed. Langford, Public Life & the Propertied 
Englishman (1991): 370. 
5 0 The 18th century was a time of noted landscapes such as Lancelot 'Capability' Brown & Humphry 
Rcpton. 
5 1 The list of estate villages relocated in the 18th. century is long, but includes such as Sudbury, Houghton, 
Lowther, Dyrham, Milton Abbas, Nuneham Courtenay, Castle Howard, Harewood, Kedleston, Blanchard, 
Coneysthorpe & Tremac. In the case of Kedleston, an Act of Parliament was required in 1760 to change the 
direction of the turnpike during the relocation of the estate village, when cottages, an inn and a mill were 
destroyed. The ancient church, around which the west wing of the house was built, remained. At Castle 
Howard, the approach to the Temple of the Four Winds now follows the original route of the village street. 
'Hundreds of ad hoc acts' continued to be passed until 1840 so that, by the beginning of Victoria's reign, 
the majority of aristocrats owned estates of 10,000 acres. Altick, Victorian People and Ideas (1973): 20. 
5 2 Mingay, A Social History oj'the English Countryside, (1990): 182. 



18 

of the boundary road, which approached the main gate to Bear Wood from both north and 

south, was bordered by the houses that made up the village of Sindlesham Green. Hence, 

the location of the buildings that formed the village was partly intended as an overt 

announcement of the existence of the estate. As with the estate villages built in the 

eighteenth century and, like most of those constructed in the nineteenth century, the 

buildings of the Bear Wood village were architecturally uniform.53 However, unlike many 

previous estate villages wherein the architecture often reflected that of the country houses 

they served, the raison d'etre of the uniform architectural style of a village like Sindlesham 

Green was intended to infer a sense of community, rather than have any architectural 

reference to the house. For example, the church, school and inn were afforded prominent 

siting along the approach road. As noted by the writer, Gillian Darley a nineteenth century 

estate village would be carefully sited: 

Without making any effort to rival the strident and amazingly intricate 
structure of the house, the village sets the building within its context -
the great mansion with the village at its gates - just as eighteenth century 
equivalents suggested their feudal origins merely by its disposition.54 

With the exception of the church which was built in Mansfield stone, the houses that 

made up Sindlesham Green were all, including the lodge at the main gate to the estate, built 

in a vernacular style of red and black brick, manufactured in brickworks constructed on the 

estate. The uniform architecture of an estate village such as this added to the impact made 

A notable exception to the uniform architecture generally employed for estate villages is that of Edensor 
relocated during the landscaping of the park at Chatsworth by 'Capability' Brown in 1761and rebuilt in 
1839 in an eclectic mix of architectural styles to suit the taste of the 6th. Duke of Devonshire. 
There are numerous examples of 19th. century estate villages built by middle class owners in conjunction 
with the construction of country houses. The list includes Waddesdon, Ascott and Mentmore, all built by 
the banking Rothschild family. Somerleyton was built by a carpet manufacturer, Penrhyn by the owner of 
slate mines. 
5 4 Darley, Villages of Vision (1975): 47. 



19 

as the estate was approached and provided a means by which the presence, the financial 

resources and the aesthetic taste of the landowner could be advertised. 

In contrast to earlier villages, relocated as the result of emparkment, or to satisfy the 

aesthetics of the landscape in proximity to the house, a nineteenth century estate village, 

such as Sindlesham Green, was intended to be a very public proclamation Of the beneficence 

demonstrated by the owner towards his tenants. Such a philanthropic gesture would have 

reflected nineteenth century middle class dogma whereby notions of duty towards the lower 

classes were transmuted into the practical provision of, in this case, housing for estate 

tenants. As a member of the middle class and a disciple Of Kerr's noted concern for the 

'domestic habits of refined persons', John Walter would have epitomized the contemporary 

definition of a gentleman.55 And, as both gentleman and a middle class nineteenth century 

estate owner, he would have perceived it as his philanthropic duty to indicate his regard for 

the welfare of his tenantry by providing them with family homes within a village 

community.56 

Despite the fact that the contemporary nineteenth century view of estate villages 

was that they were a bad investment with poor rent returns often as low as 2 1/2%, an 

estate village like Sindlesham Green would have been an investment, 'viewed as a 

convenient means of transferring wealth to a future generation, while conferring current 

social status'.57 Hence, it served a dual purpose in that it not only provided a means by 

which the status and financial acumen of the owner could be underscored, but it also 

5 5 Kerr, The Gentleman's House, (1865): 63. 
5 6 Beckett, The Aristocracy in England (1986): 356. 
5 7 Ibid: 70. As noted in the Introduction, landowners, both middle class and aristocratic, increasingly 
derived incomes from entrepreneurial activities outside of their estates. John Walter, for example, derived 
income from The Times. 



20 

provided a means by which he could mitigate the philanthropic, social and moral conscience 

that was integral to middle class ideologies.58 Within the context of the village community 

there was the church to watch over religious morals, the school to provide a rudimentary 

education, the houses to shelter the family unit and, not least, an inn, a source of leisure and 

entertainment, but conveniently located for supervision. 

Besides such apparent acts of philanthropy and beneficence, there were other 

motives, among which, as housing historian Enid Gauldie notes, was a 'wish to have on 

their estates a docile and dependent people'.59 Hence, even if purportedly constructed 

under the rubric of benevolent ideals, an estate village such as Sindlesham Green indicated 

the control the owner could exercise over its inhabitants. It was he who decided on its site, 

its architectural details and its plan, as well as who would be desirable tenants and under 

what constraints they should live; it was he who retained the rights of the advowson for the 

village church. He, in fact, can be seen to have created a systematically planned, 'sheltered, 

protected and regimented rural community' by means of which he could impose a notable 

moral influence on its inhabitants.60 As owner, he had the authority and the power to 

control the economic, religious, social and moral well-being of his tenants.61 

The building of an estate village, therefore, by a middle class estate owner such as 

John Walter provided a means by which he could enhance both his philanthropic standing as 

well as his dignity and authority within his community. In architectural terms, such dignity 

5 8 There is some evidence to suggest that the Walter family demonstrated a philanthropic conscience. The 
Twenty Second Report with Statement of Accounts for the years 1880 and 1881 for the Association for the 
Sale of Work by Ladies of Limited Means lists John W. Walter, Esq., M.P., Bearwood, Wokingham as 
Treasurer: Mrs. Walter, Bearwood, Wokingham as Honorary Secretary: D/EWLF10R.O. 
5 9 Gauldie, Cruel Habitations (1974): 44. 
6 0 Ibid: 97. 
6 1 At Wallington, Northumberland, Sir John Trevelyan built both church and estate village and would 
allow no Nonconformist worship on the estate, despite it being situated in the area where John Wesley had 
preached with such influence. 



2 1 

and authority were apparent in the associative hierarchy that appears evident in the building 

materials used for Sindlesham Green village and Bear Wood house. Whereas the church 

was built of the Mansfield stone that was also applied as dressings to the main house, 

unadorned brick was used for the village buildings, as well as for the servants' wing at Bear 

Wood. Within the context of middle class ideas about hierarchy and morality, did the 

Walter family consider itself, in its superior position of authority and perceived dignity, to 

be more upright than either the tenants or the servants, a notion that they manifested in 

architectural terms? 

It might be presumed that John Walter III, like other men in his position of estate 

ownership, was acting with a very specific motive. It was a means by which he, as a 

representative of the middle class, could help establish an identity perceived as being 

separate from the aristocracy. His overt and very public demonstrations of philanthropy 

towards his tenants was a notable departure from the established landed gentry, who were 

generally understood to have been neglectful landlords, with little concern for the welfare of 

their tenants.62 In this way, as a representative, he could help establish an identity for the 

middle class which would set it apart from the established landed gentry. 

The life of tenants on an estate like Bear Wood, although sheltered and protected, 

took place within circumscribed and regimented limits. Their tenancy depended on their 

continued employment on the estate, as well as on their adherence to the standards of 

propriety demanded by their landlord.63 As Gauldie notes, 'nineteenth century landed 

6 2 A representative of the Enclosures Commission, appointed in 1845, 'mentioned that only the Dukes of 
Bedford, Rutland and Newcastle, and the Marquis of Exeter as being conspicuously different from the 
general run of neglectful landlords'. Gauldie, Cruel Habitations (1974): 48. 
6 3 As Gauldie notes, these tenants were the 'skilled and privileged country workers', although their 
accommodation was contingent on their labour being required on the estate. Cruel Habitations (1974): 48. 



22 

proprietors could with an easy conscience feel that it was not part of their duty to provide 

homes for the immoral, the undeserving, the socially undesirable'.64 Thus, in a position as 

autocrat, as well as philanthropist, an owner like John Walter would have been well-

positioned to impress his middle class values on his tenants: Existing within the proscribed 

boundaries of middle class ideology, these tenants were usually known for their sobriety and 

good behaviour, as well as for their moral standards and their work ethic. Constrained by 

the rules on which their continued tenancy depended, their habits, leisure pursuits, religious 

and political views were perforce shaped by a deference and obedience to the prevalent 

ideologies of their landlord.65 

Not only did the estate village provide a medium by which both the authority and the 

philanthropic concerns of the owner could be maintained, but it would also appear that it 

should also serve a more practical purpose. In line with the business acumen by which 

successful, nineteenth century middle class entrepreneurs were becoming identified, the 

owner of an estate, in providing shelter for his tenants, could ensure a supply of the 

necessary skilled labour needed to run his estate efficiently as a financially viable operation. 

How, then, did the objectives of a middle class nineteenth century owner who built 

an estate village differ from those of his landowner counterpart in the previous century? In 

many ways, they would, appear to be similar inasmuch that both can be said to have utilized 

the location of the village at the approach to their estate as a means by which to provide a 

positive and very public reinforcement of their status, emphasizing their presence, their 

This was in contrast to the tenants of 'open' villages who were not confined by the ideologies of the 
estate owner and who were often considered to be unrestrained in their behaviour. Darley addresses this 
issue of different behavioural practices between the inhabitants of 'open' and 'closed' villages in Villages 
of Vision (1975). ' ' . 



23 

authority, as well as their aesthetic and architectural tastes. Across the two centuries, there 

had been little change in the deference and obedience that were required for continued 

tenancy and employment on the estate. Any differences might, then, be attributed to other 

objectives that lay behind the construction of estate villages. 

Eighteenth century estate villages were generally built as the result of a 'ruthlessly 

efficient' relocation.66 The result, although architecturally uniform and aesthetically 

pleasing, more often than not concealed overcrowding and a lack of adequate sanitation.67 

In addition, in many cases, at country houses such as at Dyrham, Nuneham Courtenay and 

Kedleston, the church remained within the park boundaries at a considerable distance from 

the relocated estate village, proving inconveniently inaccessible to the villagers. The 

primary objective of the eighteenth century landowner was that his estate village not 

encroach within the boundaries established by emparkment, or impede the aesthetics of his 

park landscape. Unlike his middle class nineteenth century successor, he laid claim to few, 

if any, philanthropic or benevolent intentions with the construction of the village. Even 

though its location at the approach to the estate asserted the presence of the owner, it was a 

motive that did not always appear to be of primary or paramount importance. In many 

instances, these relocated earlier villages, such as Edensor, the estate village for 

Chatsworth, were out of sight of both the house and the approach to the estate, so 

indicating that a crucial factor was a concern for the aesthetics of the landscape, rather than 

to affirm any philanthropic intentions on the part of the owner.68 

6 Beckett, The Aristocracy in England (1986): 361. 
6 7 For example, the relocated estate village at Nuneham Courtenay, although architecturally uniform, 
consisted of two bedroom cottages, each one of which housed at least two families. . 
6 8 The relocation had taken place during the landscaping of the park in the 18th. century. 



24 

Nineteenth century middle class notions of civic responsibility interpreted as 

'inexorable demands of Duty' manifested themselves on country estates as apparent 

concerns for the well-being of tenantry.69 No matter what the religious affiliation of its 

members, prevalent middle class ideologies were aided by a rhetoric that embraced, 

amongst others, the Puritan-Evangelical work ethic. Cleanliness, order and efficiency, 

respectability, duty, self-help, prudence, frugality and the sanctuary of the home and family 

were all upheld as blueprints for society. Under a professed philanthropic agenda aimed at 

maintaining these middle class ethics, the construction of an estate village was intended to 

'raise standards with new houses of more ample dimensions and often with substantial 

gardens'.70 

These principles can be seen at work in an analysis of Sindlesham Green. Despite an 

inferred hierarchy assigned the inhabitants by the existence of single and semi-detached 

houses, as well as three and four cottage terraces, all had both long front and back gardens 

attached, so to provide the residents with the opportunity to usefully occupy their non-

working hours, as well as to supplement their diets, by raising produce. Walter appears to 

have subscribed to contemporary social mores, whereby the moral aspects of overcrowding 

was also of concern. According to Mingay, 'it became increasingly seen as important that 

children not share their parents' bedroom and that separate bedrooms should be provided 

for boys and girls'.7 1 It would seem that such concerns were accommodated in Sindlesham 

Green for, even in the terraced houses, there was the provision of at least three bedrooms.72 

*9 Mingay, The Unquiet Countryside, Thompson, "Landowners & the Rural Community (1989): 93. 
7 0 Mingay, A Social History of the English Countryside (1990): 182. 
7 1 Ibid. Mingay also notes that, despite the apparent concern for overcrowding, the large size of families 
meant that even the provision of at least three bedrooms did little to mitigate this problem. 
7 2 Random enquires made within the village indicate that, indeed, there were at least three bedrooms in the 
houses. 



25 

Good housing conditions and neatness of planning meant that the middle class ethics of 

cleanliness and health, considered concomitant with middle class values of moral conduct 

and the sanctity of the family unit, could be implemented and maintained due to the 

benevolent concerns of an estate owner such a John Walter. 

Like his predecessor, the nineteenth century estate owner demonstrated his 

presence, his prestige, his power and his wealth by means of his country estate. To do so 

meant that he was prepared to expend vast sums of money on both estate and country 

house!73 John Walter, even though the second generation owner of the estate, was like 

many other middle class successful entrepreneurs in that he made a considerable investment 

in the purchase of land, in the construction of a new house at its centre and a village at its 

gates.74 At the same time as Sindlesham Green was being built concurrently with Bear 

WoOd house, Walter was consolidating his land by purchasing and selling properties in the 

proximity of the estate.75 Between 1840 and 1885, he was to accumulate an estate in the 

region of 8,000 acres.76 The cost of the construction of the house, on which building finally 

ceased in 1874, was over £200,000. At almost twice the original estimate, it represented a 

considerable investment on his part, despite his annual income of £50,000;
7 7 

7 3 F.M.L. Thompson, English Landed Society in the Nineteenth Century (1963). 
7 4 The original estate of 158 acres was Crown land purchased in 1816 by John Walter II (d. 1847). He 
added an additional 146 acres shortly after his initial purchase, to compile an estate of just over 300 acres 
in total. The purchase price was S3,050. Girouard, "Bear Wood, Berkshire ", Country Life, October 17, 
1968:964. 
Although not all estates were purchased, or country houses built with newly minted money, by the 1880s, it 
was estimated that, for example, over 20% of the landowners in Lancashire had obtained their wealth from 
industry. Walton, Late Georgian & Victorian Britain (1989): 38. 
7 5 Walter built a new house on a site west of that built by his father, John Walter II. 
7 6 See Appendix A for properties and comparative valuations of the estate when owned by John Walter III. 
7 7 See Appendix B for building expenditures for Bear Wood house. 
The cost can be equated to the S300 that 'could buy a modest suburban villa' or the £2,000 that 'might be 
needed for a very large town house'. Hoppen, The Mid-Victorian Generation (1998): 336. 
In The Gentleman's House (1865) Kerr devotes 'Part Fifth' to 'Notes on Accommodation and Cost'. He is 
somewhat equivocal in his advice as to the sum to be invested. He notes, 'it must be frankly admitted that 
in spite of anxious endeavour to arrive at some standard of judgment or advice, we feel obliged to yield, not 



26 

Eulogized as a 'responsible' man of 'principles', of 'sagacity and sincerity of 

purpose', a man of 'unswerving honesty of purpose, with a disinterested devotion to public 

welfare', John Walter, through the medium of the estate village at the approach to his 

country house, was able to publicly demonstrate his 'gentlemanly' middle class notions of a 

civic conscience and duty.78 It would appear that such nineteenth century middle class 

concepts of noblesse oblige were inherently attached to the ownership of a country estate 

like Bear Wood and provided a means by which middle class social values could be 

implemented, advertised and sustained. In addition, the construction of Sindlesham Green 

would have enhanced the capital value of the estate, thus demonstrating the sagacity of the 

financial acumen of its owner. It would also have contributed to a social order maintained 

under the auspices of various benevolent and philanthropic duties. No doubt it was hoped 

that the inferences perceived and interpreted from the presence of an estate village like 

Sindlesham Green would reflect a social order whereby 'harmony rested on deference and 

obedience'.79 

before die delicacy of the subject (because it is merely a matter of business), but before die great variety of 
the circumstances and the consequent complexity of principles involved'. As a cost estimate, he admitted to 
a 'practical standard recognized' as 'ten times the rent of the house occupied, taken as leasehold and clear 
of repairs'. 381-382. 
The annual income of John Walter can be compared to what his servants might have earned. At 19th. 
century Blenheim, for instance, an under-housemaid earned S12 per annum, an upper-housemaid, S18. The 
housekeeper, in the position of a senior servant, earned $50 per annum, the butler, S75. Source: Fowler, 
Blenheim Palace ((1989): 127-128. Briggs in Victorian Things (1988) also gives examples of wages earned 
by domestic staff: 256. 
78 Dictionary oj'National Biography: 2191. 
7 9 Mingay, The Unquiet Countryside, Thompson,. "Landowners & the Rural Community (1989): 80. 



27 

For the nineteenth century middle class, confident and secure in the knowledge that 

its value system formed the foundation of contemporary society, it was a notion that might 

have been ordained by God, for had it not been adroitly affirmed in the contemporary hymn, 

All Things Bright and Beautiful: 

The rich man in his castle, 
The poor man at his gate, 
God made them high or lowly, 
And ordered their estate.80 

8 0 From Hymns Ancient & Modern (London, 1924): 496. Written in 1848 by Cecil Francis Alexander 
(1818-1895). 



28 

PART n 

(2.2) The significance of the driveway approach to the main entrance 

It was generally made quite clear that a country house and its estate was being 

approached. In some cases, the house was strategically positioned so it could be seen from 

a considerable distance as, for instance, was Belvoir Castle, high above the expanse of the 

Vale of Belvoir.81 Even if the house were hidden from public view, there were definite 

indications of the approach to it and its estate. It could be that a village, clustered around 

the approaches to the main gate, provided a very public indication of the existence of an 

estate. In addition, earlier processes of emparkment had often resulted in clearly and 

distinctly marked territorial boundaries, so that park areas adjacent to the house were 

generally contained within walls, with fences or railings defining the boundaries of the more 

distant parts of the estate. Fences or estate buildings were sometimes painted in estate 

colours in order to indicate and impress ownership, with the application of family insignia to 

entrance gates, estate cottages, or even to milestones, providing additional evidence of 

ownership.82 

The entry to a country house estate was usually supported by a lodge. In earlier 

centuries, gatehouse lodges had performed the important and necessary function of 

protection. By the eighteenth century, although still providing a means by which entry 

8 1 The original l l t h . century siting would have been for defence purposes. The current house, on which 
rebuilding started in 1801 and completed c. 1816, was in the Gothic style, under the direction of the 
architect, Matthew Wyatt. 
8 2 While there appears to be no evidence that estate colours were used at Bear Wood, they were used on 
estates such as Woburn Abbey, Calke Abbey and Waddesdon Manor. In the February 18,1865 edition of 
The Builder, the obituary to the Duke of Northumberland noted that 'many and many a village may be seen 
with a crescent painted on every door, indicating that it is ducal property': 114. 



. 2 9 

could be controlled, their function was primarily perceived as a means by which the 

immediate approach to the house could be heralded. Their very presence inferred the status 

of estate and owner. Their architectural design suggested architectural prospects within the 

gates that symbolized perceptions of erudite status that, over the centuries, had become to 

be associated with the owners of country houses. 

At Blenheim Palace, for example, designed by architect John Vanbrugh to celebrate 

the victory of the Duke of Malborourgh at the Battle of Blenheim in 1704, the lodge 

symbolically took the form of a triumphal arch to mark the entrance to the estate and the 

approach to the house. During the building of Basildon Park between 1776 and 1783, 

attention was given to the entrance lodges flanking the main gate to the estate by the 

architect of the house, John Carr of York. These octagonal lodge buildings built in ashlar 

stone with round-headed windows were a means by which the classical architecture of the 

house was introduced, complimented and signified.83 A similar intention can be seen at 

Kedleston Hall, where the lodges at the North Gate, designed by Robert Adam nearly 

twenty years earlier, had also implied the architectural glories to be seen at the house within 

the estate.84 

As in previous centuries, the very presence of lodges at the entry to nineteenth 

century country houses such as Bear Wood suggested ownership along with inferred status. 

To this, can be added the same practical aspect in that they were a means by which entry to 

the estate could be controlled. However, in many cases, these lodges were not intended to 

It is interesting to note that, in 1842, the architect J.B. Papworth, felt the need to embellish Carr's 
lodges. Papworth increased the height by about a third and added rectangular panels carved with garlands 
and lion's masks. In addition, he heightened the gate-piers and designed elaborate ornaments for them in 
cast stone. The National Trust, Basildon Park, Berkshire (1991): 34-35. 
8 4 In 1759, Robert Adam began the rebuilding of a new house at Kedleston. 



30 

introduce, or even infer, any architectural glories that might be evident in the country house 

within the gates: unlike the lodges at Basildon Park or Kedleston, for instance, the lodge at 

nineteenth century Bear Wood did not reflect the architectural design used for the house. 

Instead, lodges at the gates of country houses like Bear Wood were often in the same 

vernacular style as the nearby estate village and constructed of the same building materials. 

At Bear Wood, the single storey lodge, built of brick with a slate roof, claimed only modest 

architectural enhancement with stone window lintels and decorative barge-board gables. 

Neither its architecture nor its unpretentious size signified either the architectural 

appearance or the magnitude of Bear Wood house. In a similar manner, the pair of lodges 

at the entrance gates to Waddesdon Manor, built in the 1870s by a member of the 

Rothschild banking family, were designed by a local architect in a half-timbered vernacular 

design that reflected an architectural association with the adjacent village, rather than with 

that of the house.85 In reference to the approach to his country house, Ferdinand 

Rothschild made note of both the vernacular architecture of the lodges, as well as to his 

philanthropic propensities: 

...all the farm buildings, model cottages, and lodges were built by a local 
architect, Mr Taylor of Bierton. Waddesdon now has its hotel, its village 
hall and reading-room, its temperance and benefit societies...86 

Unlike the approach to country houses in the previous century, these nineteenth 

century lodges built for middle class owners generally offered no indication of what could 

be expected of the house itself. Neither the lodges at Bear Wood nor at Waddesdon, for 

Waddesdon, designed by the French architect, Gabriel-Hippolyte Destailleur, was built in the French 
Renaissance architectural style. 
8 6 Mrs. James Rothschild, The Rothschilds at Waddesdon Manor (1979): 3. The hotel in Waddesdon 
village was originally constructed to house the artisans working on the house. 



31 

instance, can be considered instrumental in heralding either the architecture or the 

significance of the house within the gates. 

Inside the gates, a country house would be approached by a driveway. In the 

eighteenth century, in particular, a driveway was intended as a means by which the 

significance of the house could be anticipated upon the approach. Many driveways, 

particularly those that approached the houses of the aristocracy, such as at Blenheim Palace 

and Kedleston, took a circuitous route to give an indication of the immensity of the estate. 

At Castle Howard, the driveway was an absolutely straight five -mile approach on a north-

south axis that allowed tantalizing momentary glimpses of the house across the lake, as well 

as of the Pyramid, the Temple and the Mausoleum on the estate. It was an avenue that ran 

'straight as an arrow', that was later, in the mid-nineteenth century, to be further signified at 

its southernmost point by 'the first signal of the approaching splendour' a 'huge 

monument...to the 7th. Earl of Carlisle'.87 The approach ran through Nicholas 

Hawksmoor's Carrmire Gate, a rubble-built arch with pyramids, wall, towers and turrets to 

intersect with Vanbrugh's curtain wall, complete with bastions, mock-fortifications, and 

eleven different towers. In the centre was the Gatehouse, 'whose massive arch and pyramid 

[were] Vanbrugh's fanfare to Castle Howard'.8 8 At the intersection of the avenue, on the 

east-west axis that formed the final approach to the house, was a one hundred foot high 

obelisk, raised in 1714 as a Column of Victory, ostensibly to celebrate the victories of the 

Duke of Malborough. Its presence, together with the inscription on its base, formed a 

Castle Howard Estate Ltd., Castle Howard (1988): 47. The monument was erected in 1869 by public 
subscription. It indicates the ongoing process by which the aristocracy publicly aggrandized themselves. 



32 

'suitable introduction to a survey of the domain' to not only provide a fitting tribute to the 

3rd. Earl, but also to emphatically imprint his presence as owner of the estate.89 

The approaches to many aristocratic eighteenth century country houses would offer 

carefully planned vistas, designed to terminate in architectural structures such as fountains, 

classical temples or statuary, often designed by the architect himself. These approaches 

were meant to impress for, according to the historian, Carole Fabricant, they represented, 

not only the 'aesthetically-cultivated landed gentleman', but that they were also intended to 

be a very public presentation of wealth represented in aesthetic terms.90 As Fabricant also 

suggests, these carefully planned vistas satisfied eighteenth century demands for 'variety' 

and 'novelty'. Vanbrugh confirmed this when he recorded 'several noble Lords' reactions' 

to the approach to Castle Howard: 

They are all vastly surprised and taken with the walls and their towers, which 
they talk much of. I always thought we were sure of that card.91 

In the next century, on her first visit to Blenheim Palace in 1874, Lady Randolph Churchill 

said of a view created by the eighteenth century landscape artist, 'Capability' Brown, that it 

had been'painstakingly designed to take your breath away': 

We passed through the entrance archway, and the lovely scenery burst upon 
me...Looking at the lake, the bridge, the miles of magnificent park studded with 

Historic Homes of the United Kingdom (1892) Constance Anderson, "Castle Howard": 199. 
Charles Howard, 3rd. Earl of Carlisle 1699-1738, builder of Casde Howard. 
The inscription read, in part: 

If to perfection these plantations rise 
If they agreeable my heirs surprise 
This faithful pillar will their age declare 
As long as time these characters shall spare 
Here then with kind remembrance read his name 
Who for posterity perform'd the same... 

9 0 Fabricant, "The Aesthetics and Politics of Landscape in the Eighteenth Century", Studies in 18th. 
Century BritishArt and Aesthetics (1985): 72. 
91 Historic Houses of the United Kingdom (1892) Constance Anderson, "Castle Howard": 199. 



33 

old oaks...the huge and stately palace, I confess, I felt awed. This is the finest 
view in England.92 

The driveway approach around lakes and over architect-designed bridges, such as 

those to be found at Blenheim and Kedleston, would allow a dramatic view of the house. 

Not only were these planned and manipulated approaches to eighteenth century country 

houses intended to emphasize the status and the significance of estate and owner, but they 

were also meant to increase frissons of anticipation for the architectural glories to come. 

By contrast, the approach driveway to nineteenth century Bear Wood was 

comparatively short.93 Approximately a quarter of a mile long, it led for about 120 yards at 

a slight south-west angle from the main gate and then straight south for a further 330 yards 

to the entrance to the courtyard in front of the house. It was sheltered by Wellingtonia 

trees and shrubs, the former, possibly, an announcement to the arriving visitor that the 

owner of Bear Wood was a governor of Wellington College.94 Compared to the driveway 

approaches to earlier country houses, this relatively modest approach was devoid of planned 

vistas or imposing architectural features. This can be interpreted as an indication that it was 

not intended to be a means by which to impress the size of the estate, despite it being over 

9 2 The Blenheim Estate Office, Blenheim Palace, Woodstock, Oxfordshire (1973): 2. 
9 3 This was not through lack of land. A l l the estates considered for this work were of not less than 1,000 
acres. John Walter III accumulated 8,000 acres for the Bear Wood estate. See Appendix A. 
9 4 Wellington College, a public school attended by the sons of the gentry. On Monday, November 5, 1894, 
the Times published an obituary for John Walter, "Death of Mr Walter", in which it was noted that Walter 
took great pride in his governorship of Wellington College and its association with the Duke of Wellington, 
for whom Walter had 'great admiration'. Perhaps this was that, as a middle class entrepreneur, Walter 
subscribed to general public admiration for the Duke, the battle victories of whom, it was considered, had 
started modem Britain on its path to greatness and prosperity. 
It was also noted that Walter had also planted Wellingtonia trees at the College. Walter's pride in his 
association with the school would have also referenced the importance that middle class values attached to 
the benefits of education for its own class. This is suggested, also, by his philanthropic gesture with the 
construction of a school as part of the estate village of Sindlesham Green, as well as the school built 
adjacent to St. Paul's church in nearby Wokingham, although F.M.L. Thompson states that the wealthy 
classes 'thought of school an instrument for conditioning and controlling the lower orders'. The Rise of 
Respectable Society (1988): 145. 



34 

8,000 acres, or to provide an opportunity to build up any prolonged anticipation about the 

final arrival at the house. In contrast to the sometimes extravagantly planned approaches to 

the houses of the aristocracy that publicly associated the owner with elegance and wealth, 

the driveway to a hidden, private Bear Wood can be seen as an indication that the owner 

wished to be perceived as a person of both dignity and reserve, characteristics that indicated 

the demeanour of middle class tenets. Added to the fact that the architectural mien of the 

single lodge at the entrance gate gave no indication of the significance of the house, the 

absence of a long and visually-manipulated driveway indicated an adherence to the middle 

class dogma of restraint. 

Although there appears to be no documented evidence that Kerr was consulted for 

the design of the lodge, or for the driveway approach for that matter, it can be presumed 

that his maxim that 'it must be looked upon as a rule that an English gentleman will desire 

to avoid obtrusiveness even at the sacrifice of a good deal of that importance' was 

subscribed to.9 5 At both the approach to the main entrance gate to Bear Wood, as well 

along the driveway, there was no display or indication of ostentation, or of opulent wealth. 

Rather, it would appear that the initial approach to the house along the road that bounded 

the estate was primarily intended to publicly underscore the middle class values to which the 

owner, in his role of English gentleman, subscribed and by which he would be identified. 

The fact that a house such as Bear Wood was set behind estate walls, away from 

public view, approached by a lodge architecturally expressed in the local vernacular and 

along a relatively short drive acknowledged the deliberate separation of the house from the 

public, outside domain. This separation provided a means, both physically as well as 

Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 51. 



35 

perceptually, by which the private realm could be both disassociated and protected from the 

public sphere. This intention can be interpreted as the first indication of one of the major 

tenets on which nineteenth century middle class ideology was based, the maxim of 

• 9 6 

privacy. 

It was a maxim that was not evident in the previous century for, although the 

driveway approach considerably distanced country houses and their inhabitants from the 

outside world, eighteenth century country houses were intended to be the seat of an 

ostentatious and very public life-style, even if available only to those of 'suitable' rank. 

There had long been a tradition of allowing suitable persons 'of quality' to tour these 

country houses and the adjoining parkland, so providing a means by which the erudite 

acuity and elite status of the owner could be demonstrated by the architecture and the 

contents of his house, as well as by the size of his estate.97 Writing of the eighteenth 

century, the historian, Peter Mandler states: 
...a remarkable apparatus of country house visiting grew up, held in check 
only by the still-considerable physical barriers to travel...Visitors were carefully 
vetted at the lodge gates, their dress, servants, conveyances and 
calling-cards checked for suitability, before they were shown around house 
and grounds.. .From the 1760s, guidebooks to individual properties began 

98 

to appear... 

Despite their distance from the entrance gates, these country houses were available and 

were intended to be viewed by others who were outside the immediate circle of family or 

It is a maxim with which Kerr deals extensively in his book, but particularly in reference to the spatial 
organization of the interior, which will be referenced in Part IV of this thesis. 
9 7 The majority of the country houses owned by aristocrats were open to tourists, although some required 
written appointments. Traditionally, it had been the upper servants - the butler or the housekeeper - who 
had conducted the tours, using the 'tips' as a means of supplementing their incomes. At Blenheim, for 
example, visitors had toured the estate from the time construction had started on the house. 
Across the centuries, English novelists such as Fielding, Richardson, Jane Austen, Thackeray, H.G. Wells, 
Galsworthy and Evelyn Waugh all wrote about the country house. Austen, in particular, refers to 18th. 
century excursions undertaken to tour country houses. 
9 8 Mandler, The Rise and Fall of the Stately Home (1997): 9. 



36 

guests. It was a tradition the aristocratic owners of country houses, unlike contemporary 

middle class proprietors, were to maintain in the nineteenth century, for many of them 

continued to open their estates and country houses to visitors. At Blenheim, around mid-

century, during the time of the 7th. Duke, a sign inside the Triumphal Arch entrance gate 

read, 'The Duke of Marlborough begs the persons who may walk through the park to keep 

to the high road, and not walk on the grass'.99 In 1892 it was noted that 'the master of 

Belvoir allows the public to see nearly everything of interest in the Castle'.1 0 0 

It was a tradition, however, that was not to be adopted by nineteenth century middle 

class owners of country houses for, despite any historical precedents, the issue of privacy 

was considered, as Kerr put it, to be ' a first principle with the better classes of English 

people...'101 The fact that the middle class country house owner did not adopt, carte-

blanche, all the practices of his aristocratic predecessors might indicate that he did not wish 

to be perceived as indiscriminately emulating the habits and traditions that had been seen as 

part of ownership. Rather than the self-aggrandizement undertaken by the aristocracy, it 

would appear that, as a disciple of middle class doctrine, the nineteenth century middle class 

owner wished to proclaim values that focused on the attributes of restraint and privacy in 

the domestic realm, rather than on providing opportunities for a public display of rank and 

status. The driveway approach to the house, as in the case of Bear Wood, can be 

interpreted as a series of successive steps, each a means by which the inhabitants could 

consider themselves to be protected away from the public domain and the public eye. 

9 9 Fowler, Blenheim, Biography of a Palace (1989): 149. The 7th. Duke of Malborough, 1822-1883, sue. 
1857. 
100 Historic Houses of the United Kingdom (1892) Charles Edwards, "Belvoir Castle": 227. 
1 0 1 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 67. 



37 

The final approach to the entrance facade of Bear Wood from between the border of 

trees was through a narrow gateway into a courtyard surrounded by an eight foot high wall. 

There were no tantalizing glimpses of the house, no indication of what was to be expected. 

It was not until this final rampart had been breached that the full impact of the entrance 

facade of Bear Wood was revealed. Some 200 feet long and extended for a further 120 feet 

by the servants' wing to the east of the courtyard, the north facade of the house was four 

stories high, with cellars beneath. With a staircase tower and gables rising for a further two 

stories, the sudden revelation of the architectural mass of the house would, undoubtedly, 

have made an impressive and awesome impact. 

This entrance front of Bear Wood, by its architecture and by its size, paid tribute to 

the wealth, the status and the authority of its owner, albeit the impact made by the entrance 

facade of Bear Wood was the absolute antithesis of the maxims of Robert Kerr, that 

coupled privacy with the desire to 'avoid obtrusiveness'.102 These maxims were evident in 

the immediate approach to a house hidden from public view, past an architecturally modest 

lodge and along an equally modest driveway. However, the impact made by the impressive 

entrance facade of the house suggests the diversity of nineteenth century middle class tenets 

that embraced restraint along with the desire to advertise the rewards of successful 

entrepreneurialism and hard work. 

102 Ibid. 



38 

It would appear that Kerr, as architect of Bear Wood, allowed for both to be 

accommodated, although never at the expense of that most important middle class tenet, 

domestic felicity. He instructed his readers: 

Let it be again remarked that the character of a gentleman-like 
Residence is not a matter of magnitude, or of costliness... 
If, on the other hand, the circumstances of the owner and his 
tastes are such that the magnitude and refinement ought to expand 
into state, even grandeur must not be pretentious, or wealth ostentatious, 
and the attributes of an agreeable English home must never be sacrificed.103 

103 Ibid: 66. 



39 

P A R T m 
T H E E X T E R I O R A R C H I T E C T U R E 

(3.1) The issue of an architectural style 

In what Style of Architecture shall you build your house?.. .The architect 
himself will generally put this query to his client... [who] is expected to 
make a choice from amongst half-a-dozen prevailing "styles", all more or 
less antagonistic to each other, all having their respective adherents 
and opponents, and all very likely to prove more and more unintelligible 
the longer they are examined... 

These words, written by Robert Kerr in 1865, indicated that the issue of a distinctive 

architectural style to be considered representative of nineteenth century England had not 

been resolved.104 Kerr's statement also indicated that it was an issue that was of much 

concern for the private, domestic realm as it was for an architectural style considered 

appropriate for the public sphere. 

The issue surrounding an architectural style to characterize the nineteenth century 

had been inaugurated in the latter part of the previous century, when a changing social 

structure instigated, in large part by an emerging middle class, had fostered notions of an 

impending age that was to be both new and different. Debate centred around what would 

be taxonomically identifiable with the vigourous and vibrant nineteenth century with which 

the middle class, in particular, identified itself. It was anticipated that the new style was to 

be the antithesis, as Kerr was later to note, of the 'chaste, elegant, but rather feeble' 

architecture that had represented the 'philistinism of the Georgians'.105 

1 0 4 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 340. 
105 "English Architecture Thirty Years Hence ". A speech read by Kerr in 1884. Quoted in Pevsner, Some 
Architectural Writers of the Nineteenth Century (1972): 293. 



40 

The architecture associated with this earlier age was to be replaced by one that 

would reflect a social order becoming increasingly more influenced by the middle class and 

its values. Such values founded on virtues that included national pride, industry and 

ambition, an honest common sense, pious Protestant Christianity and domestic felicity had, 

according to historian, Richard Article created a 'moral climate in which rectitude, chastity 

and seriousness had replaced easy going sexual attitudes and gay cynicism'.106 Added to 

this was a class that considered itself to be synonymous with the progressive, modern 

Victorian era, a perception endorsed by Kerr who, in 1846 in his overviews of 

contemporary architectural styles in Newleafe Discourses, had referred to the middle class 

as 'us railway travelling, Reform-bill people'.107 

On the one hand, there were those who, as the architectural theorist, Peter Collins 

notes, championed the revival of 'one particular period in history as a pure source of 

inspiration'.108 Architects who supported this faction showed a cornmitment to a particular 

historical style, be it classical Roman or Greek, the Renaissance, Old English Elizabethan 

and Jacobean, or Gothic.1 0 9 In country house architecture, William Wilkins, for example, 

had continued his commitment to the classical Greek Revival Style with The Grange in the 

early years of the century. Nearly forty years later, Frederick Pepys Cockerell was to design 

Down Hall as 'a symmetrical, classical house'.110 Salvin referenced the Tudor for such 

country houses as Scotney Castle in 1837 and Peckforton Castle in mid-century. At the 

1 0 6 Altick, Victorian People and Ideas(1973): 3. 
1 0 7 Published in 1846. Quoted in Pevsner, Some Architectural Writers of the Nineteenth Century (1972): 
219. 
1 0 8 Collins, Changing Ideals in Modern Architecture (1965): 118-119. 
1 0 9 Girouard states that 'classical styles were losing ground all the time'. The Victorian Country House 
(1979): 52. 
1 1 0 Ibid.: 404. 



41 

same time, A.W.N. Pugin demonstrated his advocacy for the Gothic at Scarisbrick. For 

these architects, there was just one distinctly representative style. 

In contention there were architects who considered that 'all styles were of equal 

value, and that the whole notion of stylistic integrity or stylistic tradition was an illusion'.1 1 1 

Architects who represented this faction did not commit to any specific historical style, but 

referenced a variety, generally according to the demands of their clients. Sir Charles Barry, 

for instance, produced two designs for Wollaton, the first in 1838 in the Palladian style, the 

second two years later in the English Elizabethan tradition.112 

It was a rivalry that, as Stevenson observed, 'obscured and rendered almost 

impossible, an answer to the question' of what constituted an architectural style 

representative of nineteenth century England.113 By mid-century, however, although Ken-

indicated that the issue of a distinct architectural style for the era had not been resolved, a 

consensus between the contending parties had been reached. At this time, the consensus for 

many was for Eclecticism, defined by Collins as the taking of 'tectonic elements from every 

style and re-amalgamating them according to contemporary needs.114 In this, Collins 

echoes Kerr, who had determined Eclecticism to be a 'novel but striking doctrine' that used 

various architectural models 'indiscriminately and interchangeably' so that it was a 'style of 

miscellaneous connoisseurship'.115 Stevenson, in turn, saw it as a 'rich pictorial confusion 

that expressed the spirit of the times'.116 He also appeared to accept the consensus of 

Eclecticism as a befitting resolution of the issue around an architectural style representative 

1 1 1 Collins, Changing Ideals in Modern Architecture (1.965): 117'. 
1 1 2 Harris, The Architect and the British Country House (1985): 216. 
1 1 3 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7(1880): 25. 
1 1 4 Collins, Changing Ideals in Modern Architecture (1965): 118-119. 
1 1 5 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 49-50 & 342-343. 
1 1 6 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. I (1880): 62. 



42 

of the era for, as he noted, 'there are probably too many opposing modes of thought at 

present for one style to be a suitable expression of them a l l ' . 1 1 7 Despite this, Stevenson 

expressed some pessimism about the eclectic approach: 

We have cut ourselves loose from tradition. Instead of accepting 
and trustfully following the ways and customs handed down to us, 
we claim to be absolute judges of right, and make our individual 
preferences laws. It would need omniscience not to fail. 1 1 8 

However, whatever the architectural style, Stevenson felt it should 'express our present 

civilisation, our modern feelings and ways of thinking'.119 

If nineteenth century needs and 'modern ways of thinking' are defined in terms of 

the middle class and its values, then this architectural eclecticism might be seen to reflect 

both its heterogeneity and the various ways in which it represented itself. This was 

particularly true' in private, domestic architecture where, in contrast to public buildings, 

there was the freedom for an independence of spirit that allowed for the expression of 

personal predilections of taste. The individual tastes expressed in domestic architecture 

were a means by which many of the values of an owner could be demonstrated. 

The compromise that was Eclecticism was a multi-layering of styles, incorporated 

into one building. Pevsner reiterates an analysis of nineteenth century architecture given by 

the contemporary critics, Redgrave and Wornum, who described the eclectic style as 

free and mixed Renaissance... a modern adaptation of Classicism (primarily 
Italian) received through a French channel, but with a treatment 'throughout 
English, massive and bold, picturesque even, when required, substantial 
and unaffected...120 

1 1 7 Ibid.: 120. 
1 1 8 Ibid.: 14. 
1 1 9 Ibid.: 121. 
1 2 0 Pevsner, Some Architectural Writers of the Nineteenth Century (1972): 234. 



43 

'And this', continues Pevsner, with reference to Redgrave and Wornum, 'is the perfect 

definition of Kerr's chef-d'oeuvre, Bearwood...very large, very sensibly planned but 

externally an ill-disciplined [architectural] mixture,..121 Despite Pevsner's inference that the 

architectural style of Bear Wood was 'ill-disciplined' and despite Kerr's assertion that the 

'present practice of Eclecticism...adopts... [styles] quite indiscriminately and 

interchangeably', it could be argued that the choice was not random, that instead, it was an 

architectural compromise, a response to the debates at hand. 

The following analysis of the exterior of Bear Wood will confirm this. In spite of 

what Pevsner perceives to be a capricious choice of eclectic architectural styles, or what 

Kerr theorized to be the indiscriminate interchanging of different styles, in the architecture 

of a nineteenth century country house like Bear Wood, can be detected very specific 

meanings and associations. It will be argued that the incorporation of various styles 

suggests many of the values to which the middle class owner subscribed and, as such, 

conveyed much of what the nineteenth century social order represented. 

1 2 1 Ibid. 



44 

P A R T I Q 
T H E E X T E R I O R A R C H I T E C T U R E 

(3.2) The North Entrance Front 

Like many country houses built by the nineteenth century middle class, the 

immediate approach to Bear Wood appeared to be discrete and unmanipulated. However, 

the contrast made by the vigorous impact of the sudden revelation of the massive north 

front of the house can be seen as a public and definite pronouncement of prestige and 

splendour: the rewards of the entrepreneurial acumen of the owner. Added to this was the 

inference that such rewards could be similarly achieved through hard and judicious work 

and the application of diligence and tenacity. 

The description that the nineteenth century critics, Redgrave and Wornum gave to 

contemporary architecture as 'massive', 'bold' and 'substantial' could well have applied to 

the impressive size of the entrance facade of Bear Wood. 1 2 2 Over three hundred feet in 

length, the north front supported a staircase 'some 30 feet square at the base', with a porte-

cochere and window bays of similar width.1 2 3 The four-storey facade was increased for a 

further two stories by the height of the staircase tower and facade gables. 

Although not as large as eighteenth century Castle Howard, Holkham or Kedleston, 

the impressive size of Bear Wood was, in the same way as were these earlier country 

houses, material evidence of wealth that, in turn, conferred an elitist status on their owners. 

Added to this were perceptions of power and authority that, by tradition, were considered 

the right and the duty of the owners to exercise; As a holder of public office, an owner 

1 2 2 Pevsner, Some Architectural Writers of the Nineteenth Century (1972): 234. 
1 2 3 The Builder, "Bearwood", June 6, 1868. 





45 

dispensed temporal justice, often from within the house itself, whereas a domestic chapel or 

estate church meant he held religious authority over his household and tenants. 

Traditionally, country houses could be viewed by the public. Particularly in the 

eighteenth century, this was considered a means by which the significance of the owner 

could be advertised. In addition to his status, power and authority and his wealth, it was 

intended that the house represent the eighteenth century owner as a cosmopolitan, well-

travelled Man of Taste, long-established and recognized as a leader in society, elegant, 

confident in his superiority and of his rightful place at the apex of the social order. 

Although not intended to be seen by the public visitor, Bear Wood was also 

intended to convey meanings beyond those of status and wealth. The nineteenth century 

middle class identified itself with the greatness of the nation. This, translated into 

patriotism, contributed towards a nostalgia for England's past, the glories of which the 

middle class associated with its own times and own achievements. Contemporary feelings 

of patriotism, interpreted into architectural form required, as the nineteenth century 

architectural critics, Redgrave and Worrium noted, an architecture perceived as being 

'throughout English'.1 2 4 As such, architecture was to reflect prevalent feelings of 

patriotism and to reject as un-English and alien, the classically inspired architecture 

associated with the previous century. 

Pevsner's assertion that Redgrave and Wornum's analysis of nineteenth century 

architecture was the 'perfect definition of Bear Wood' indicates the eclectic incorporation 

of architectural styles that included 'a modern adaptation of Classicism (primarily Italian) 

received through a French channel..'125 This 'French channel', represented by French 

1 2 4 Pevsner, Some Architectural Writers of the Nineteenth Century (1972): 237. 



46 

Renaissance architectural elements, are evident on the exterior. There is, for example, the 

steep-pitch of the roof line, inset dormer windows and the steep, four-sided turret roof 

above the entrance tower. How, then, could this apparent contraction between an 

architecture that referenced the French, be compatible with the suggestion that the middle 

class owner be represented as a patriotic English gentleman? 

Kerr appeared to overcome this contradiction by a process of theoretical 

transmogrification, whereby he translated French Renaissance as 'English Renaissance'. 

This was legitimate, he argued, because the transmogrification of the French, or even the 

Italian Renaissance, into the 'English Renaissance' was a process legitimated by common 

usage. Kerr termed this 'English practice'.126 That this might be a specious argument was 

evident to his professional peers. For instance, the reviewer of The Gentleman's House in 

the February 18, 1865 edition of The Builder brought Kerr to task for his logic, noting that 

the 'circumlocution' of his designation of 'English Renaissance' to what were obviously 

foreign architectural references meant that he was 'likely to mislead' and that his assertions 

were 'erroneous'. 

An additional explanation as to why French Renaissance architectural elements were 

incorporated into Bear Wood is that the style may have had some association with the great 

urban hotels. As Girouard points out, by 1863, 'French style' had become the 'pre-

eminent' architecture for many hotels that 'offered the latest refinements of luxury and 

technology to a predominantly middle class clientele [and] underlined the fact that London 

was now the commercial centre of the world'.1 2 7 Often attached to a railway station, these 

hotels offered a refuge and a retreat from the vicissitudes of travel, in the same way that the 

Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 365. 
Girouard, The Victorian Country House (1979): 293. 



47 

middle class perceived their homes to be a refuge and retreat from the tribulations of the 

outside world. As a business man, active in the progressive, modern world of commerce, 

John Walter was also considered to be 'technically-minded'.128 The fact that Bear Wood 

referenced elements of the French Renaissance style of architecture, that the latest 

technology was used for its construction and the conveniences installed inside the house, 

indicates that Walter could well have been influenced by these London hotels.129 This is 

especially likely for, in travelling from Paddington station to his home near Reading, John 

Walter would have been familiar with the architecture and the 'refinements of luxury' of the 

hotel that formed part of the Paddington railway terminus.130 

Nineteenth century references to English architecture, be they direct or 

transmogrified through Kerr's process of the 'common usage' of 'English practice', were 

also the result of the effects of industrialization during the nineteenth century. These 

effects, combined with increasing urbanization, contributed to a nostalgia for England's 

past, particularly for rural traditions and their association with a simpler life now lost to the 

speed and sophistication of an industrialized world. In architectural terms, this nostalgia, 

this looking back towards the past, resulted in an architecture that was perceived to reflect 

Old England. 

References to the Elizabethan and its associations with the glory of that past age and 

its prodigy country houses, were considered particularly appropriate for their nineteenth 

century counterparts. There was also an element of nationalism in such references. As Ken-

noted about the Elizabethan, 'there is, in fact, a strong nationality in it. Here was a style 

128 

129 

130 

The Times, "Death of Mr Walter", November 5, 1894. 
The issues of technology, comfort and convenience will be discussed in Part IV of this thesis. 
The Great Western Hotel at Paddington was in the French Renaissance style. 



48 

which was without dispute the unimported product of the soil...' 1 3 1 He pointed out, 

however, that he and his architectural peers translated, rather than made authentic 

references, to the past. As he noted, the 'authentic architecture of the period exhibits 

nothing like the intentional irregularity' of the style used in his 'modern' age.132 Based on 

this, Kerr's interpretation of the style for the entrance porch at Bear Wood can be seen to 

exactly fit requirements in that it 'exhibit certain leading principles, which distinguish the 

new Elizabethan from the old'. As he wrote: 

...in modern designs...it is generally deemed desirable to produce a 
certain amount - frequently a very considerable amount - of positive 
intentional irregularity...in the Entrance-tower there is presented an 
instance.. .whereby the building is sought to be grouped, by the 
formation of one prominent feature, at a prominent point iri the 
composition, and that point not a central point.133 

At Bear Wood, Kerr grouped a projecting entrance porch between the mass of the staircase 

tower and a gabled bay window so that it was a prominent feature exactly opposite the 

entrance gateway leading into the forecourt. 

To the supposition that this reference to Elizabethan architecture inferred 

associations with past greatness, can be added the suggestion that Bear Wood be regarded 

as a 'seat of hospitality'.134 This, as it has been noted, was a wish expressed by the owner, 

one that reflected the middle class ethos that the home be considered a welcoming refuge. 

Perhaps it was that Kerr intended to infer this with the entrance porch offset exactly 

1 3 1 Kerr, The Gentleman'sHouse (1865): 351. 
1 3 2 Ibid: 352. 
1 3 3 Ibid. 
1 3 4 Expressed by John Walter at the ceremony marking the completion of the house. Reported in The 
Builder, June 6, 1868. Henry-Russell Hitchcock writes of die 'disarmingly middle class inscription, 
'welcome' in large letters' on the small gatehouse entrance to Tortworth Court, designed by S.S. Teulon for 
the Earl of Ducie. Early Victorian Architecture in Britain (1954): 236. 



49 

opposite the main gateway to Bear Wood so that it appear to reach out to 'embrace' and 

welcome the arriving visitor. 

Nostalgia for England had also been fuelled in the first decades of the century by, for 

instance, the literary works of Sir Walter Scott as 'the inspiration behind the.. .idealization of 

the age of chivalry'.135 Alongside this was 'the actual and enormous influence' of Ruskin, 

who based his doctrine on the 'principal centres' of 'Truth, Beauty and Morality'.1 3 6 

Architecture, noted Ruskin, should be an 'expression of a whole way of life' as well as a 

reflection of the 'spiritual goodness' of the architect.137 Persistent in his doctrine, Ruskin 

was an influential advocate for the revival of Gothic architecture, a style he considered to be 

the embodiment of 'true Christian feelings'.138 

In his theoretical discourse, Kerr itemized the 'characteristics of the Gothic manner, 

as applied to domestic building in England' for his readers. Many of the Gothic 

'characteristics' itemized by Kerr can be identified in the north facade of Bear Wood. There 

was, for example, evidence of an 'intentional irregularity of plan' which included an 

'intentional variety in height' in the roofscape; a 'general verticality of features, emphasized, 

for instance by the narrow, vertical windows of the staircase tower and the pinnacles 

surmounting the parapets of the staircase and entrance towers. 

The incorporation of architectural elements into Bear Wood to which Gothic 

characteristics can be applied, might be interpreted as an indication that Kerr wished to 

acknowledge the Christian principles to which the owner subscribed.139 However, the mere 

Altick, Victorian People and Ideas (1973): 5. 
Ladd, The Victorian Morality of Art (1968): 3. 
Williams, Culture and Society (1958): 145 & 137. 
Ibid. 
It has been noted that John Walter HI, built a church and other ecclesiastical buildings. 



50 

evidence of the Gothic cannot be considered sufficient to substantiate this, particularly as, in 

itemizing Gothic architectural characteristics, Kerr made no reference to Christian 

principles.140 Perhaps it was that Kerr employed the references to the Gothic more for its 

aesthetic appeal than for any religious connotation. Or perhaps it was, as Stevenson 

observed, that the incorporation of such architectural elements into Bear Wood can be 

attributed to the fact that the 'freedom of the Gothic' had 'got rid of the trammels of 

Classical rule'.1 4 1 As Kerr, himself, had written: 

The nineteenth century has introduced Gothicism; it is a powerful, 
uncompromising, resolute, and sometimes insolent insurrection 
against this Classicism...142 

An equally nebulous association between Bear Wood and another of Ruskin's basic 

principles of Gothic architecture, that of Truth, can be examined. Stevenson was to emulate 

Ruskin with his mandate that 'materials should show themselves to be what they really 

are'.1 4 3 If Kerr did have any intentions of implying the principles of truth, of the honesty of 

construction to the house, then they might be identified in the exposed brickwork of the 

facade. Rather than be masked by the deceit of stucco, as had been the practice in the 

previous century, the brickwork of the main house was only partially concealed by 

decorative stone dressings. The brickwork of the servants' wing was completely exposed. 

Whether the exposure of brickwork at Bear Wood was intended to emulate Ruskin's notion 

of Truth cannot be ascertained. However, from the descriptive vocabulary appropriated to 

him, it would appear that John Walter III would have considered that he represented the 

1 4 0 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): Chapter IX, 367-373. 
1 4 1 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7(1880): 331. 
1 4 2 Kerr, "English Architecture Thirty Years Hence " in Pevsner, Some Architectural Writers of the 
Nineteenth Century (1972): 295. 
1 4 3 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7(1880): 28. 



, 51 

honest, upright, moral integrity by which the middle class wished to be identified.144 Or, 

perhaps it was that the completely exposed, unadorned brickwork of the servants' swing, 

was intended to confirm hierarchical differences between the status of the owner and that of 

the servants. 

There can be little doubt that John Walter wished to not only proclaim his status and 

wealth, but also to represent himself as a vigourous, dignified and responsible member of 

the middle class. This can be surmized from the impression conveyed by the north entrance 

front of Bear Wood. The impact it made upon arrival with its massive, impressive size 

displayed the authority, the importance and the vivacity with which the middle class 

identified itself. Likewise, the square solidity Of the staircase and the porte-cochere, the 

sharp triangular gables, the serried rows of pinnacles surmounting the parapets of the 

towers, all contributed to the impression of an aggressive and solid masculinity. The shape 

of the carved shields above the entrance suggested military connotations and an associative 

masculinity. Such proclamations represented an age of which Kerr said, 'there may be a 

certain vigour of manliness reserved for the English, which, in an age of increasing 

manliness arid increasing English influence, shall accomplish unexpected results'.145 As 

Girouard now notes, this 'vigorous school in architecture goes with the Victorian cult of 

manliness... of physical and moral fibre'.146 

Although Pevsner might claim that the incorporation of a range of eclectic 

architectural elements into Bear Wood was 'ill-disciplined', the choice was not random. 

1 4 4 See Dictionary of National Biography, Walter John 1818-1894 & The Times, "Death of Mr Walter", 
November 5, 1894. 
1 4 5 Kerr, "English Architecture Thirty Years Hence " in Pevsner, Some Architectural Writers of the 
Nineteenth Century(1972): 308. 
1 4 6 . Girouard, The Victorian Country House (1979): 56. 



52 

The various interpretations that can be applied to the different architectural styles represent 

many of the middle class values upheld by both owner and architect. However, like the 

competing voices that had resulted in a consensus for eclectic architecture, there would 

appear to be no coherent statement discernible in the architectural styles evident in the 

entrance facade of Bear Wood. Despite the initial impression of status and wealth, there are 

other messages that can be extrapolated from the architecture, all of which combine to 

represent a middle class that, both complex and diverse, embodied much of the nineteenth 

century social order. 



53. 

P A R T m 
T H E E X T E R I O R A R C H I T E C T U R E 

(3.3) The south garden front 

If the architectural references on the north entrance facade of Bear Wood indicated 

a public proclamation of certain middle class tenets, then the south garden front might be 

seen to represent the private, domestic realm. This would support the argument that many 

of the values to which a nineteenth century middle class country house owner subscribed 

were expressed in diverse ways in architectural form. 

Turned away from public view as the house was approached, the south front of Bear 

Wood stood high overlooking a terrace and gardens leading down to a lake and across the 

estate. This garden aspect would suggest associations with the feminine, an inference 

suggested by Ruskin with his notions of femininity linked with nature. In Sesame and 

Lilies, for instance, he wrote of 'womanly beauty..! wish you specially to notice:- "Three 

years she grew in sun and shower"...Observe', wrote Ruskin, 'it is Nature who is speaking 

throughout and who says, "while she and I live together'".147 Both Kerr and Stevenson 

reiterated this concept in an architectural context. Kerr equated the aspect for a house 

directed towards the 'sunshine', the 'lawn', or the 'flower-garden' with the 'ladylike' 

connotations of 'salubrity', 'cheerfulness' and 'lightness', notions with which Stevenson 

1 4 7 Ruskin, Sesame and LUies (1887): 141. With 'womanly beauty', Ruskin is referring to beauty of the 
soul, associated with the role of the woman in the domestic realm, rather than to physical beauty. 
References cited for two of Ruskin's books, Sesame and Lilies and Queen of the Air are from 1887 
publications, although Ruskin noted in Preface (p. viii) of the latter that he had written it in May, 1869 from 
work 'begun thirty years ago'. The Preface to Sesame and Lilies (Eighth Edition in Original Form with 
New Preface) is dated August 24, 1883. It is, therefore, assumed that the influence of Ruskin's work had 
been in effect for some 50 years before the 1887 edition. 





54 

concurred.148 These associations of femininity with domesticity are attested to by Girouard, 

who 'suspects' that Kerr, in contrast to the massive, rigorous masculinity of the architecture 

of the north facade, wanted the south garden front at Bear Wood to be 'gracious and 

feminine'.149 

The same impression of size given from the driveway approach to the house 

remained, for the south front stretched along a terrace for nearly 300 feet, to terminate in a 

water tower and the domestic offices. However, unlike the entrance facade, it would 

appear that the architecture employed for this garden front was not intended to make the 

same vigorous impact. In contrast to the square solidity of the main staircase tower, the 

porte-cochere and window bays, the sharp triangular gables and the aggressive serried row 

of pinnacles reaching upwards from the staircase and entrance porch towers, this south 

elevation was surmounted by curved gables that reflected, 'the curves of nature'.150 In a 

Ruskinian-type association of the feminine with nature, the recessed arched gables were 

surmounted by carved stone cartouches. However, unlike the crested shields on the 

entrance facade with their reference to the military, these round and trefoil shapes followed 

the 'curves of nature'.151 As Stevenson affirmed, one of the primary aims of nineteenth 

century middle class domestic architecture and ornament was 'to express our domestic 

life'. 1 5 2 The suggestion that this be referenced by nature can be endorsed by the 

architectural ornament. The carved foliage in the garden facade gables, for instance, 

1 4 8 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865) & Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. II (1880). Both Kerr and 
Stevenson particularly referred to these issues in relation to the aspect of rooms designated for use by the 
female, such as the drawing room and the boudoir. The issue of gender-designated rooms will be addressed 
in Part IV. 
1 4 9 Girouard, The Victorian Country House (1974): 122. 
1 5 0 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7(1880): 47. 
1 5 1 Ibid. 
1 5 2 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7(1880): 69. 



55 

'followed the spirit of nature', as did the trefoil cartouches, a shape that, according to 

Stevenson, would have been 'directly borrowed from the trefoiled grasses of the fields'.153 

A small tower set into the roofline, as well as the young ladies' staircase tower, were 

both topped with curved cupolas surmounted by ornamental wrought iron weather vanes. 

The parapet of the garden staircase tower, unlike the entrance staircase tower which soared 

above the roofline, was in line with the roof parapet, thus imposing no aggressive 

interruption on the facade. The four-sided pyramid roof of the garden staircase tower had 

only corner pinnacles, rather than the serried row on the north towers. Likewise, the 

parapet of the water tower had just corner pinnacles. The window bays on the south front 

were angled at the sides, with the one on the immediate west side of the house in a demi-

lune curve. Rather than the impression of the stolid, square 'boldness, breadth, strength, 

sternness and virility' given by the north facade, there appeared to be on the south front, 

with its curved gables and its angled window bays, a movement, an undulation, a rhythm 

along the length of the house.154 

In the architectural details of the south garden front with, for example, the curved 

gables, with the seemingly rhythmic effect of the facade and with the cupola-topped towers, 

architectural references might be made to the Elizabethan.155 However, rather than it being 

a patriotic reference to the 'glorious old English times', as has been suggested for its 

incorporation into the entrance facade, references to the Elizabethan evident in the gables 

and cupola roofs of the garden facade reflected Kerr's description of a style he considered 

1 5 3 Ibid.: 47 & 48. 
1 5 4 Kerr used this terminology in his 1884 retrospective of architecture. Kerr, "English Architecture Thirty 
Years Hence " in Pevsner, Some Architectural Writers of the Nineteenth Century (1972): 296. 
1 5 5 In Country Life, "Bear Wood, Berkshire -1" (October 17, 1968): 965, Girouard considers it to be an 
amalgamation of Elizabethan and Jacobean, which he refers to as 'Jacobethan'. 



56 

to offer 'variety which is permanently charming...unostentatious and subdued...refined and 

rendered graceful...and the elegancies of repose elaborated'.156 Both architectural 

expression and vocabulary suggest nineteenth century notions of the feminine. 

Further evidence indicates that Kerr intended the south front of Bear Wood to 

represent the private, domestic facade of the house. The roof tower, with its cupola roof 

and ornamental weather vane, was located immediately above the second floor rooms 

allocated for the private use of the family.157 The design of this tower was repeated in the 

tower at the end of the domestic wing. Perhaps it was that Kerr wished to associate the 

domestic connotations associated with this wing with the south front in which the family 

rooms were located. 

That the south front should be considered 'gracious and feminine' was also 

supported by the installation of two carved angels on the garden entrance to the house.158 

Of this statuary, The Builder reported. 

At the garden entrance, of which a view may be found in the present 
exhibition of the Royal Academy, two figures of considerable beauty, 
Night and Morning, modelled, but not yet put into stone, will form a 
portion of the doorway.159 

Again, it might appear that Kerr was influenced by Ruskin upon whom Coventry Patmore's 

poem, "The Angel in the House" had made an impression.160 The doorway guarded by the 

angels at Bear Wood, unlike that at the main entrance made aggressively prominent with the 

porte-cochere extending out into the approach courtyard, was recessed into an entrance 

1 5 6 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 351. 
1 5 7 A study of these family rooms, that included the nursery, the family bedroom, boudoir and the young 
ladies apartments will be undertaken in Part IV. 
158 The Builder, June 6, 1868, "Bearwood". 
1 5 9 Ibid. 
1 6 0 Coventry Patmore (1823-1896) wrote "The Angel in the House" in 1854. Quoted by Ruskin in Sesame 
and Lilies (1887): 133. 



57 

porch in the facade between two bay windows, both of which angled in towards the 

domestic interior. This might be interpreted that the angels guarded the entrance to the 

inner sanctum where, in Ruskinian terms, the 'greatest treasure' was to be found in the 

domestic realm.161 

The contrasts in architectural styles between the north and south facades of 

Bear Wood were not evident in country houses of the eighteenth century. At Kedleston, for 

example, Adam designed the north entrance front in the Neo-Classical manner to be the 

'grandest Palladian facade in Britain'.1 6 2 For the south garden facade, he also referenced 

the classical, with the central feature based on the Arch of Constantine in Rome, combined 

with the low-stepped dome of the Pantheon.163 Kedleston, like most eighteenth century 

country houses, could be viewed by the public visitor, so it might be presumed that both 

approach and garden facades were designed to be a monumental and grandiose display of 

the aesthetic sensibilities of the owner, a means by which the power and the prestige 

associated with country house ownership could be reinforced. As at Blenheim Palace, 

Castle Howard and Basildon Park, where both approach and garden fronts also referenced 

classical architecture, these facades were intended to be a public affirmation of the status 

and erudite acuity of the owners. Unlike the inferences apparent in the garden facade of 

nineteenth century Bear Wood, there was no reference to middle class tenets that alluded to 

the private, the domestic, or that appeared to have associative connotations with the 

'gracious and feminine'.164 

1 6 1 In "Of Queens' Gardens", Sesame and Lilies (1887) Ruskin states that 'woman's true place and power' 
is in the home: 138. 
1 6 2 Quoted in The National Trust, Kedleston Hall, Derbyshire (1993): 10. 
1 6 3 Ibid. 
1 6 4 Girouard, The Victorian Country House (1974): 122. 



58 

The use of ornament in domestic architecture has always been considered a means 

by which status and taste could be advertised, a notion as appropriate to nineteenth century 

country houses as it was to those of the previous century.165 As Collins states, 'the essence 

of architectural ornament...is that it was symbolic', that it symbolized power.166 However, 

it would appear that, anxious to express a separate and specific identity of class, nineteenth 

century middle class country house owners adopted styles of domestic architecture and 

ornament that were intended to represent their values, as well as their individual 

predilections of taste. Like their predecessors, it was a taste made confident by their wealth 

and their perceived place in the social order. 

The fact that nineteenth century taste has been seen as 'strident' and 'abundant' 

might be equated to a contemporary increase in consumerism, particularly by the wealthy 

middle class.167 It was an increase that reflected England's continuing prosperity for, as 

Ruskin noted, 'the wealth of a nation is only estimated by what it consumes'.168 As the 

nineteenth century progressed, advances in manufacturing processes and transportation 

made the acquisition of material goods more readily available. However, the 'singularities', 

the 'novelties' and the 'gaudiness' evident in the goods produced were of concern to 

Ruskin, who admonished that they were 'corrupting of public taste', as well as 'encouraging 

public extravagance'.169 

1 6 5 Collins offers this interpretation in Changing Ideals in Modern Architecture (1965): 124. 
1 6 6 Ibid.: 127. 
1 6 7 Girouard, The Victorian Country House (1979): 54. 
1 6 8 Quoted in Macleod, Art and the Victorian Middle Class (1976): 209. Macleod states that Ruskin 
echoed the economists Smith and M i l l . 
1 6 9 Ruskin made these observations in a speech to manufacturers in Bradford. Quoted in Williams, Culture 
& Society (1958): 144. 



59 

Despite Ruskin's concern, the 'extravagant public' could justify both their 

consumerism and their abundant use of ornament. In 1856, had. not Owen Jones, for 

example, stated that 'ornament must necessarily increase with all peoples in the ratio to the 

progress of civilization'?170 Hence, under Jones' rubric that the use of ornament be 

considered the 'natural result of cultural evolution', middle class consumers could be 

confident that they represented the zenith of the evolutionary process.171 Unrestricted by 

the parameters imposed by references to the classical, they could represent their 

predilections of taste with eclectic and individualistic choices. As Gottfried Semper noted 

in 1869, the 'striving for individuality tends to express itself in adornment'.172 

In eighteenth century houses, the classical exterior architecture was either severely 

unadorned, as at Holkham, even though, as Stevenson acknowledged, the 'mere 

arrangement.of masses of building' could produce the 'artistic effects' of ornament.173 

Others carried applied ornamentation that referenced the classical, as at Castle Howard and 

Kedleston, with the Greek fret ornament, honeysuckle, the acanthus leaf, or statuary on the 

parapets and pediments of the buildings, all of which carried connotations of aristocratic 

taste.174 By the Victorian era, such architectural ornament was considered un-English, it 

had no associations with the English countryside and was, thus, not representative of the 

spirit of the age, or of nineteenth century middle class tastes or values. 

1 7 0 Owen Jones, "Grammar of Ornament", quoted in Collins, Changing Ideals in Modern Architecture 
(1965): 124. 
1 7 1 Ibid. 
1 7 2 Quoted in Collins, Changing Ideals in Modern Architecture (1965): 124. 
1 7 3 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7(1880): 44. 
1 7 4 Blenheim Palace, in addition to military references, such as the British Lion mauling the French 
Cockerel, also carried classical statuary as exterior ornamentation. 



60 

The eclectic range of architectural styles evident in nineteenth century country 

houses reflected the similar range of ornamentation applied to the facades. The use of 

colour as a form of architectural ornament on nineteenth century country houses like the 

polychrome brick Elvetham Hall, or the diapered red and white facade of Wyfold Court 

could, perhaps, have been justified as an expression of moral and spiritual integrity.175 As 

Ruskin had noted in Stones of Venice, 'the purest and most thoughtful minds are those 

which love colour best'.176 Conversely, however, such strident use of colour might be seen 

as an expression of individual taste, a striving for individuality. Compared to such as 

Elvetham or Wyfold, the exterior facades of Bear Wood were relatively discrete. Apart 

from the stone crests on both north and south facades and the carved foliage on the garden 

front gables, the architectural ornamentation for Bear Wood was of Mansfield stone 

dressings that, on the main part of the house, partially concealed the brickwork. Single 

string coursings in the brickwork that delineated the floors were the only ornamentation 

applied to the domestic wing. 

The contrasts between this relatively subdued ornament on Bear Wood and the more 

strident ornamentation on other contemporary country houses demonstrated, not only 

individual predilections in taste, but also the many ways in which the nineteenth century 

middle class represented themselves. As Stevenson noted, architectural ornament was 

individual, an 'expression of themselves'.177 This might be applied to Bear Wood, where it 

would appear there was a very specific attempt on the part of Kerr as architect, to portray 

1 7 5 Elvetham Hall, built between 1859 & 1862 by S.S. Teuton for the newly ennobled Lord Calthorpe, 
made prosperous from investing in Egbaston, a suburb of the industrial city of Birmingham. Wyfold Court, 
built between 1872 & 1876 by G. Somers Clarke for Edward Hermon, M.P. and cotton manufacturer. 
1 7 6 Ruskin, Stones of Venice, Chapter 5, quoted in Garrigan, Ruskin on Architecture (1973): 43. 
1 7 7 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7(1880): 69. 



6 1 

his patron in a particular way. It would seem that John Walter was to be represented as the 

epitome of dignified, serious and refined ideals, the personification of a responsible, middle 

class gentleman owner of a country house. 

In his advice for the'house of a gentleman', Kerr wrote: 

...the higher the standard of intellectual eminence, and the more overflowing 
the supplies of material wealth, the more decided may be the reactionary 
principle...it involves finish, precision, delicacy, and repose without Ostentation 
of any kind; it is not rich, or elaborate, or sumptuous or gay; it is subdued 

. power which corresponds to cultivated, perhaps satiated, taste.178 

It would appear that he put his advice into practice at Bear Wood. While the size of the 

house leaves no doubt as to the wealth and status of the owner, the architectural 

ornamentation can be seen as a means by which the owner, like other contemporary middle 

class country house owners, represented both the tenets he endorsed, as well as his personal 

and individual tastes and predilections. 

Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 86. 





61b 

Figure 6 



61c 



62 

PART IV 
T H E DOMESTIC INTERIOR 

(4.1) Robert Kerr's consideration of the domestic interior and the primacy of spatial 
organization 

Let it be again remarked that the character of a gentleman-like Residence 
is not a matter of magnitude or costliness, but of design...The qualities 
which an English gentleman of the present day values in his house are 
comprehensively these :-

Quiet comfort for his family and guests, -
Thorough convenience for his domestics, -

Elegance and importance without ostentation.179 

In a book that offers a wide range and detail of information, from an historical 

overview of the development of the domestic house to notes on architectural style, from a 

treatise on considerations of aspect to advice on a system for calculating costs, the major 

attention given by Robert Kerr in The Gentleman's House was on what he termed his "Part 

Second. The Principles of Plan as Now Established". In the introduction to this section, 

Kerr clearly advocated that the 'maxims of design' to be considered were the principles 

applied to the interior plan. These, he noted, were the key principles, although he 

acknowledged the merits of architectural style, the use of the most modern and scientific 

methods of construction, as well as the investment to be expended. To further support to 

his belief in the primacy of the 'maxims of design', he added that 'nothing...will be held to 

compensate for the want of these less striking but more fastidious characteristics'. In 

reviewing the book, The Builder noted that, for Kerr, it was 'a new era in domestic plan', to 

be considered under the categories which he laid out as:180 

179 

180 
Kerr, the Gentleman's House (1865): 66. 
The Builder, "The Gentleman's House", January 28, 1865: 58. 



63 

Privacy. 
Comfort. 
Convenience. 
Spaciousness 
Compactness 
Light and air. 

For the further edification and instruction of his readers, Kerr examined and 

exemplified each of these listed 'fastidious characteristics', followed by an equally detailed 

analysis of each of the domestic spaces he designated for a specific use. It might then be 

assumed that the detailed and dogmatic attention Kerr gave to the principles of the spatial 

organization of the domestic interior embodied nineteenth century middle class ideals that 

the home of an 'English gentleman' should accommodate and implement the tenets to which 

he commonly subscribed. 

Salubrity. 
Aspect and prospect. 
Cheerfulness. 
Elegance. 
Importance. 
Ornament.181 

Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 67. 



64 

P A R T I V 
T H E D O M E S T I C I N T E R I O R 

(4.2) Issues of domesticity, the family unit and domestic felicity 

O f the many and diverse ideologies appropriated since the nineteenth century to the 

middle class it is the institution of the home, with its attendant perceptions of the family 

unit, that provided a cornerstone on which the identity of that class was constructed. A t the 

turn of the nineteenth century, new perceptions of the family unit, particularly among the 

more affluent, developed and progressed to culminate, as the social historian, Joan Perkin 

suggests, in the 'Victorian family' winning a 'reputation as a noble institution upon whose 

countenance depended all that was fine and stable in B r i t a i n ' . 1 8 2 

During the course of the nineteenth century, the influence of such major social 

critics as John Ruskin supported notions of domestic felicity and the domestic sphere as 

being the foundation on which the greatness of the nation was sustained. Perceptions o f the 

domestic sphere as a sanctuary, a refuge, with the family incubated from the anxieties of the 

outside world, is made clear, for example, in two lectures delivered by Ruskin, published 

jointly under the title of Sesame and Lilies.183 O f the family unit and the 'true nature of the 

home', he wrote: 

- it is the place of Peace; the shelter, not only from all injury, but from all 
terror, doubt and division. In so far as it is not this, it is not home; so far 
as the anxieties of the outer life penetrate into it, and the inconsistently-minded, 
unknown, unloved, or hostile society of the outer world is allowed by either 
husband or wife to cross the threshold, it ceases to be home; it is then only a 
part of that outer world which you have roofed over, and lighted fire in. By 

1 8 2 Perkin, Victorian Women (1993): 74. 
1 8 3 The two lectures were: "Of Kings' Treasures" & "Of Queen's Gardens". 
As has been noted, it is presumed that the influence of Ruskin's work had been in effect for some time 
before 1887. 



65 

so far as it is a sacred place, a vestal temple, a temple of the hearth watched over 
by Household Gods, before whose faces none may come but those they can 
receive with love, - so far as it is this, and roof and fire are types only of a 
nobler shade and light, - shade as of the rock in a weary land, and light as of 
the Pharos in the stormy sea; - so far it vindicates the name, and fulfils the 
praise, of Home.184 

It was a sentiment both endorsed and manifested during the nineteenth century so 

that, as architectural historian, Annmarie Adams has since noted, the institution of the 

family home was to become established as a 'separate sphere, a product of the so-called cult 

of domesticity', that provided an isolated refuge.185 This separation provided the middle 

class with a means by which, both conceptually and physically, it could identify itself as 

being apart from other social classes. In contrast to the more public lifestyle practiced by 

the affluent in the domestic realm in earlier centuries, the spatial organization of a middle 

class family home was adapted to new and very specific ways to accommodate the 

domestic unit By 1880, this had been confirmed by J.J. Stevenson, who acknowledged that 

an overview of'house-planning' provided a means by which the 'social condition and family 

life' could be realized in architectural form.186 

In the previous century, details of architectural design and spatial organization, 

particularly in the homes of the wealthy, had been concerned with the aesthetic rather than 

with the practical or the efficient, or with the requirements of family or domestic life. The 

eighteenth century architect specifically allowed for rooms in which the scale and 

disposition were suitable for the display of sculpture or artworks, collected to underscore 

the educated and erudite status of the owner.187 Compared to prevalent nineteenth century 

1 8 4 Ruskin, Sesame and Lilies (1887): 136-137. 
185 Adams, Architecture in the Family Way (1996): 5. 
1 8 6 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7/(1880): 2. 
1 8 7 For example, Kent had created the Landscape Room at Holkham to house artworks collected by Thomas 
Coke, 1st. Earl of Leicester during his European Grand Tour. In the 1750s, at both Syon and Osterley, 



66 

concerns that domestic space should sustain the requirements of domestic, family life, 

eighteenth century architects such as Robert Adam had, at Kedleston for instance, focused 

on the aesthetic. Hence, primary planning considerations were for architectural style, 

interior design and for the integration of the decorative arts. In contrast to this, nineteenth 

century architects like Kerr were to focus on the minutiae of the spatial organization of the 

domestic interior to result in what Stevenson later referred to as the 'multifariousness' of 

'modern planning' that had become necessary to 'keep pace' with the 'more complicated 

ways of living'. 1 8 8 With a concern for the delegation of interior space for use by either 

individual, or for a particular function or task, nineteenth century architects provided a 

blueprint from which contemporary perceptions of domestic life could be implemented. 

Fuelled by the influence of such as Ruskin, these perceptions were that the domestic sphere 

be a 'place of Peace', a 'shelter' from all the 'terror, doubt and division' of the outside 

world'. 1 8 9 Through the media of both the architectural design and the spatial organization 

of their domestic space, the middle class instigated and cultivated the concept that the 

sanctity of hearth and home shaped a private environment that allowed the family unit to 

'shut out the reality of social problems, so to create a fantasy world of security, isolation 

and comfort'.190 

Robert Adam remodelled the dining rooms to accommodate sculpture. At Newby Hall, a Sculpture Gallery 
in the Adamesque style was especially constructed in 1765. 
1 8 8 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7/(1880): 47. 
1 8 9 Adams in Architecture in the Family Way (1996) quotes Ruskin's Sesame and Lilies in which he noted 
his anxieties of the outside world, anxieties that included the 'spread of infection, the rationalization of 
knowledge, scientific theories of sexual difference, the emancipation of women': 5. 
1 9 0 Adams, Architecture in the Family Way (1996): 5. 
The nurturing of domesticity was adopted at the very top echelons of society. Following the death of the 
Prince Consort in 1861, Queen Victoria mourned the loss of a 'pure, happy, quiet domestic life'. Nevill, 
Life in the Court of Queen Victoria (1984): 1. 



67 

This is an argument that can be substantiated, for example, by the image presented 

in a portrait of William Armstrong of Cragside, who had founded a fortune as 'one of 

Britain's greatest geniuses and mightiest industrialists'.191 By 1880, when Armstrong's 

portrait was painted, it would appear that middle class notions of domestic felicity had 

become firmly entrenched. The picture shows Armstrong in a mood of fireside informality, 

seated in the inglenook of his dining room, wearing country clothes, reading a newspaper, 

legs crossed, dogs at his carpet-slippered feet.192 To support this image of middle class 

domesticity, of a sheltered, peaceful family life, into the stone over the fireplace was etched 

'East West, Hame's [sic] Best'.1 9 3 Such an image of the sanctity of hearth and home was 

one to which many of the 'fastidious characteristics' that had been first noted by Kerr in 

1865, such as privacy, comfort, cheerfulness, salubrity, can be applied. How, then, might it 

be seen that Kerr actually accommodated these characteristics, considered both then and 

later in the century, to be an integral part of middle class domestic felicity, into his spatial 

organization of the interior of Bear Wood? 

It has been suggested earlier in this work that, on the approach to Bear Wood, there 

were indications that it was intended to be perceived as the seat of the private, domestic life 

of the Walter family. There was, for example, the short and secluded driveway approach to 

the house, as well as sigriifiers of domesticity in the exterior architecture, particularly on the 

south facade. That the Walter family did subscribe to contemporary middle class notions 

appropriated to the family unit might be based on a tribute paid to John Walter at the time 

of his death. At that time it was written, T can bear testimony to his private and personal 

1 9 1 The National Trust, Cragside (1994): 5. 
1 9 2 Painted by Henry Hetherington Emmerson (1831-1895). The National Trust, Cragside, 
Northumberland (1992): 51. 
1 9 3 The portrait remains in situ in the dining room at Cragside. 



68 

virtues, to the manner in which he performed all the duties of social life - those of husband, 

father, friend, of Christian, in fact, and general benefactor'.194 How, then, did Kerr's 

application of his very specific theoretical architectural maxims to the sphere of domestic 

space at Bear Wood allow the Walters to reflect nineteenth century middle class ideals of 

domestic felicity and a private, family life sheltered from the terror, doubt and division of 

the outside world? 

Kerr was adamant that the house of a 'gentleman' be 'divisible into two 

departments; namely, that of THE F A M I L Y , and that of THE S E R V A N T S ' . 1 9 5 At Bear 

Wood, provision was made for this with a distinctly separate wing for the servants. The 

division between family and servants reflected the contemporary perception that England 

was made up of two societies, between whom, as Disraeli wrote in Sybil: 

there is no intercourse and no sympathy' who are as ignorant of each 
other's habits thoughts and feelings, as if they were dwellers in different 
zones, or inhabitants of different planets; who are formed by a different 
breeding, are fed by a different food, are ordered by different manners, 
and are not governed by the same laws... THE RICH AND THE POOR. 1 9 6 

This can be seen to be reflected in the domestic sphere, whereby the spatial organization 

specifically separated the family (the rich) from the servants (the poor).1 9 7 However, despite 

this overt separation, but in line with the growing concept of the sanctity of the middle class 

home as a refuge from the outside world, it was imperative that the apparent felicity of the 

entire domestic household be maintained.198 To achieve this, each inhabitant, whether 

194 The Times, "Death of Mr Walter", Monday, November 5, 1894. 
1 9 5 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 64. 
1 9 6 Benjamin Disraeli, Sybil (1845) quoted in Altick, Victorian People and Ideas (1973): 11. 
1 9 7 It might be posited that the precept applied to society as a whole. When reflected in the home, it was, 
in effect, 'society writ small'. 
1 9 8 The notion of the appearance of domestic harmony was to continue, although Kerr's system of a distinct 
separation between family and servants was challenged in 1880 by Stevenson. On the subject of unity, 
Stevenson wrote, 'there must be communication between all the several parts of the house under one roof-
shelter. It must be one house, hot several'. House Architecture, Vol. II (1880): 48. 



69 

family, guest or servant, should appear to accept a defined role, with all roles closely related 

within the spatial organization. The intention was that the domestic unit, operating under a 

hierarchical paterfamilias system, would then emulate middle class ideals of familial 

harmony.199 It was an intention supported by the accepted precepts of hierarchy, of both 

class and gender, on which much of the nineteenth century middle class tenets were based. 

In addition to this, Kerr's separation of space between family and servants, as well as his 

detailed designation of task-specific space, would have provided a physically constricted 

environment that allowed little opportunity for casual social interaction across boundaries, 

even within what he termed, the 'two departments' of the household. 

At Bear Wood, the appearance of domestic harmony was abetted by Kerr's 

designation of task-specific rooms for the servants. Space allocated to, for instance, the 

brushing room, the cleaning room, the still room, the scullery or the pastry kitchen, meant 

separation and isolation for those involved in the work.2 0 0 Throughout the range of the 

servants' wing, Kerr created a multiplicity of subdivisions in both the working and sleeping 

1 9 9 Until the Married Women's Property Acts of 1870 and 1882, financial independence on the male 
maintained patriarchal control and, under the law, an economic hegemony. See Perkin, Victorian Women 
(1993): 76 & 114-117. In White, Male and Middle Class (1988) Catherine Hall confirms that the property 
of wealthier married women was sometimes protected by a marriage settlement allowing for partible, rather 
than primogeniture, inheritance, although the 'forms of female inheritance tended increasingly to be linked 
to [male] dependence': 98. Further, until the introduction of the Matrimonial Causes Act in 1857 under 
which applications could be heard in specially set up civil courts, marital divorce had required an individual 
Act of Parliament, thus limiting it to the very wealthy or influential. 
2 0 0 Section II of Kerr's book addressed 'The Domestic Offices' in what Stevenson regarded as 
'multifarious' detail: In addition to the commonplace kitchen and scullery, he also advised on the Cook's 
Pantry or Dry-Larder, the Meat-Larder, Game & Fish Larders, the Pastry-Room, Salting Room, Smoke-
House and Bacon-Larder, the Dairy and Dairy Scullery. For each, he gave detailed suggestions for the 
correct dimensions of the space, for the apparatus, along with an appropriate layout for fittings and 
equipment. In similar detail, subsequent Sections offered advice on the Upper Servants' Offices; the Lower 
Servants Offices; the Laundry Offices; Bakery and Brewery Offices; Cellars, Storage and Outhouses, etc.; 
the Servants' Private Rooms; and Thoroughfares, Supplementaries, and General Arrangement of Offices. 
This multiplicity of subdivision of space was implemented in many 19th century country houses in which 
could be found a myriad of task-specific rooms that included kitchen departments for cleaning vegetables, 
rnaking pastry, making preserves. There were wet and dry laundries, compartments for coal, oil, wood, 
ashes, swill and dust. There were rooms for cleaning lamps, boots and knives, as well as the Valet's 
Brushing Rooms next to the Visitors' Brushing Rooms, even rooms for ironing newspapers. 



70 

accorhmodation spaces allocated to the servants. One intention was that the isolation of the 

individual into either task-specific or compartmentalized living areas should lessen the 

interaction between the occupants. This, it might be presumed, would reduce the 

opportunities for domestic friction to occur whilst, at the same time, contribute to the 

efficiency and productivity of labour. In addition, it can be seen that, distinguished by their 

designated use, these rooms allowed for an inferred hierarchy to become associated with 

that domain and with the servants who worked in, or occupied, them. The floor plan of 

Bear Wood supports this in that it indicates that the upper servants, the housekeeper, the 

butler and the cook, were assigned private spaces in which to work and sleep, a designation 

that contributed to and supported the preferred status of the individual. 



71 

PART TV 
T H E DOMESTIC INTERIOR 

(4.3) On the issue of spaciousness 

Not only did the designation of space for specialized occupancy contribute to the 

implementation and separation of multifarious domestic units, but the provision for task-

specific specialization also contributed to increasing the overall size of the house. The size 

of a house, as has been noted, was a traditional strategy that inferred status and one that 

continued to be adhered to in the mid-nineteenth century by middle class country house 

owners. That the size of a country house was a means by which the status and prestige of 

the owner could be advertised was a fact of which Kerr was only too aware.201 Translated 

by him into 'spaciousness', and an 'amplitude of space' when applied to the interior, it 

allowed, as he noted, the 'self-esteem of a man...to expand and acquire vigour under the 

simple influence of elbow room'.2 0 2 In the interior of Bear Wood, Kerr was to provide 

ample elbow room with a 70 by 24 foot gallery, a 40 by 24 foot dining room and inter-

connecting morning and drawing rooms of 96 by 26 feet, for example, all of which 

supported 15 foot high ceilings.203 

Even allowing for the fact that Bear Wood was a large establishment, Kerr applied 

the same principle of 'spaciousness' to smaller houses he built for less affluent middle class 

families. For instance, The Builder carried an article on Kerr's plan for Ascot Heath House 

which he designed for John Delane, John Walter's editor at The Times. The Builder made 

2 0 1 See arguments presented in Part II (1.2) referring to the massive and impressive entrance facade of Bear 
Wood. 
2 0 2 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 74. 
2 0 3 lO'-l 1' ceilings were considered suitable only for servants. 



72 

particular note of the fact that Kerr had designed the public rooms at Ascot Heath so that 

they could be thrown open 'to provide for occasional receptions of a special character', 

whereby the 'aggregate suite for receptions attains the extent of nearly 150 ft. of available 

length', thereby accommodating the owner's requirement for an 'amplitude of space'. At 

the same time, elucidating the importance that was attached to domestic felicity, it was 

pointed out that this spaciousness was achieved 'without any sacrifice of the domestic 

simplicity and convenience ofthe dwelling for every-day uses'.204 Unlike the equally 

large, or even larger public rooms in earlier country houses that had been intended to 

accommodate a markedly public lifestyle, rooms such as these at Bear Wood or Ascot 

Heath, although comprising an 'amplitude of space', were intended for a more private, 

domestic lifestyle, primarily for the immediate family and their guests.205 Despite this, the 

size of the public rooms were a means by which the self-esteem, the status and' the prestige 

of the owners could be affirmed. 

However, if this 'amplitude of space' was not intended to accommodate a public 

lifestyle as it had in earlier country houses, it might be assumed that the objective was to 

distinguish an identity other than of status and prestige. By the attention Kerr gave to the 

issue of spaciousness, it would appear that he intended that 'under the simple influence' of 

'elbow room' the 'self-esteem of a man' would 'expand and acquire vigour'. And, it was as 

vigorous and expansive members of a progressive and modern society that mid-nineteenth 

The Builder, "AscotHeath House", December 19, 1868: 929. 
Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 74. 



73 

century middle class owners, such as John Walter or John Delane, wished to be 

perceived.206 

In contrast to this, the issue of spaciousness in the domestic interior was also one of 

practicality and good, economic common sense, particularly when applied to space 

allocated to the servants. It was a principle confirmed by Kerr, who advised 'it is manifest 

that the amount of accommodation must be regulated directly by the list of the servants to 

be kept. This list being determined, the accommodation has simply to be made to 

correspond'.207 Despite the notion that the number of servants a family could afford to 

retain conferred status on the employer, Kerr pointed out that excessive space for domestic 

chores was not advisable in the interests of either expenditure or efficiency. He cautioned 

that ' i f on the contrary it be the accommodation that is first determined, and this in excess 

for the sake of completeness, the corresponding excess o f servants must inevitably follow, 

with a long succession of pecuniary consequences'.208 

Despite Kerr's advocation, his floor plan for Bear Wood indicates that the 

complement of domestic staff in the Walter household was meant to reflect the status and 

prestige of the family. Space was specifically allocated on the first floor of the servants' 

wing for at least eleven female domestic staff.209 However, the number of female servants 

was higher, no doubt, than specified in the floor plan. For instance, accommodation for the 

It is interesting to note that, by the 1880 edition of Stevenson's House Architecture, the notion of self-
esteem invigorated by an 'amplitude of space' had changed. Stevenson advocated 'compactness and 
simplicity' rather than 'numerous staircases, needless corners and tortuous passages': 49. 
2 0 7 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 74. 
2 0 8 Ibid.: 201. 
There is some irony in Kerr's concern with expenditure, particularly as his original estimate for Bear Wood 
had doubled by the time of its completion. 
2 0 9 The sleeping rooms for a nurse, 2 lady's maids, 4 housemaids (2 per room), 2 kitchen maids, the 
Housekeeper and the Cook female servants are specified. 



74 

staff of the nursery, or the laundry staff was not indicated.210 Further, Kerr made no 

specific note of where the male servants were to sleep on the top floor of the servants' 

wing, in addition to which they often slept in various areas of the house to provide 

protection for the premises.211 At Bear Wood, the floor plan indicated sleeping space for a 

footman in the gentlemen's cloakroom located adjacent to the front entrance, the butler was 

assigned a bedroom adjacent to the plate safe. Based on the sleeping space indicated for the 

servants and allowing for unspecified space for additional staff, it can be estimated that Bear 

Wood might have carried a complement of twenty to twenty five indoor domestic staff.212 

That the middle class Walter family could afford to employ such an impressive number 

would, undoubtedly, have conferred status on them. In addition, the number of staff 

retained might be regarded as a means by which current perceptions that, able to provide 

the extensive task-specific space necessary to accommodate such a complement of servants, 

the family could be seen to represent the progressive, modern approach to convenience and 

efficiency by which the class wished to be identified. 

2 1 0 The floor plan also indicated a bedroom for the governess, although her somewhat ambivalent position 
between servants and family precludes her from being considered as domestic staff, despite her being so 
listed at the contemporary country house, Brodsworth Hall. Source: English Heritage: information 
provided at the house. 
2 1 1 In previous centuries, servants had slept close to the family as a form of mutual protection, also to be 
within earshot before the advent of mechanical bell-systems. 
2 1 2 In The Gentleman's Country House (1981): 87 Franklin considers that, although the numbers varied, 
there were usually no fewer than 15 indoor servants, with as many as 40, in country houses 
contemporaneous with Bear Wood. At the lower end of the social scale, a signifier of middle class status 
was the fact that the family could afford to employ, even if only one maid-of-all-work, a live-in servant. For 
the aristocracy, the tradition of a large establishment was often upheld: when the 15th. Earl of Derby died in 
1893, he acknowledged 727 retainers and servants in his will. Maroon, The English Country House (1978): 
102. 



75 

PART IV 
THE DOMESTIC INTERIOR 

(4.4) On the issue of privacy 

Not only did the separation and designation of space within the domestic interior of 

country houses such as Bear Wood allow for a seemingly harmonious, albeit hierarchical 

and patriarchal, social system to operate, but the system also accommodated a further 

requirement of middle class domestic ideology, that of privacy. It was a requirement that 

proved to be both fundamental and of particular concern in the spatial organization of the 

middle class domestic sphere. Privacy headed the list of Kerr's 'fastidious 

characteristics':213 

It is the first principle with the better classes of English people that the 
Family Rooms shall be essentially private, and as much as possible the 
Family Thoroughfares. It becomes the foremost of all maxims, therefore:., 
that the Servants' Department shall be separated from the Main House, so 
that what passes On either side of the boundary shall be both invisible and 
inaudible on the other.214 

In Bear Wood, with its distinctly divided departments between family and servants, 

Kerr put into practice what he advised. 'The idea which underlies all', he wrote, 'is simply 

this. The family constitute one community, the servants another...each class is entitled to 

shut its door upon the other and be alone'.215 However, Kerr's didactic approach to 

ensuring privacy was one with which Stevenson, in his works published in 1880, was not 

entirely in agreement. 'Is not this carrying the separation a little too far?' he asked, 

2 1 3 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 67. 
2 1 4 Ibid. 
2 1 5 Ibid: 68. 



76 

'...should the mistress not have the fun of her own house? Should not the master know his 

servants when he meets them?216 

Historian, Griselda Pollock is of the opinion that the nineteenth century notion of 

domestic privacy in spatial terms had 'certainly existed before the eighteenth century'2 1 7 

The concept of privacy, with the allocation of separate spaces, can be increasingly discerned 

in previous centuries in the houses of the wealthy. Stevenson wrote of the provision of 

'privy lodgings' and 'privy galleries' evident in earlier house planning and noted that, as 

early as the fifteenth century, 'a change in the social state' meant that the 'privee [sic] 

parlour' for family use was established.218 This can be seen at Haddon Hall where there 

was a private parlour leading off the communal great hall. By the turn of the sixteenth 

century, the architect, Robert Smythson had located private, family lodgings at Hardwick 

Hall on the second floor, with the public rooms of state on the third and the household on 

the main floor.2 1 9 The provision for domestic privacy was further extended towards the end 

of the seventeenth century with the addition of corridor space, primarily intended for the use 

of the servants, behind the enfilade of public rooms 2 2 0 This can be seen, for instance, at 

Chatsworth, an Elizabethan house remodelled in 1688 2 2 1 As the architectural writer, Robin 

Evans notes; increasing demands for private space resulted in the division of domestic space 

into 'two domains - an inner sanctuary of inhabited, sometimes disconnected rooms, and an 

2 1 6 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. II (1880): 78 & 79. 
2 1 7 Ibid. As early as 1604, Sir William Wentworth of Wentworth Woodhouse had advised, 'Take heed 
what you speak before them [servants]...' Quoted in Girouard, A Country House Companion 1987): 128. 
2 1 8 Ibid.: 36&20. 
2 1 9 Haddon Hall, originally a medieval stronghold for the Cavendish family. Hardwick was built at the 
turn of the 17th. century for Bess of Hardwick, matriarch of the Cavendish family, Dukes of Devonshire. 
2 2 0 Ibid. In the 17th century, architect Sir Roger Pratt had noted, 'ordinary servants may never publicly 
appear in passing to and fro on their occasions there'. Evans, Translations form Drawing to Building 
(1997): 71. 
2 2 1 Haddon Hall, Hardwick Hall & Chatsworth were all built for the Cavendish family and illustrate the 
growing requirements demonstrated by this one family for increasing privacy in their domestic space. 



77 

unoccupied circulation space...that became a recognizably modern definition of privacy'.222 

By the eighteenth century, the separation of private space for the family away from the 

public areas of the house was more evident in some country houses. At Blenheim, for 

example, Vanbrugh allocated rooms east of the enfilade of state rooms especially for use by 

the family, whilst at Kedleston, the east wing, detached from the state rooms, was for the 

family. 

Such provisions were, however, exceptional, in that the majority of eighteenth 

century country houses did not offer such distinct private areas for family use. Ken-

recognized this in a review of spatial planning in The Gentieman's House. In considering 

the improvements that the Anglo-Palladian plan, used so extensively for country houses in 

the eighteenth century, had introduced, Kerr referred to Holkham, begun in 1733. At 

Holkham, according to Kerr, there had been a lack of progress in the development in the 

spatial organization of the domestic interior, primarily because there had been relatively 

little attention paid to ensuring the privacy of the inhabitants. He decried the 'deficiency of 

ordinary passages' in the interior of Holkham, as well as what had been the continued 

'readiness...universally exhibited to create thoroughfare-rooms,",223 'Respecting privacy', 

Kerr continued, again referring to the interior at Holkham, 'the progress had been little...the 

thoroughfare rooms, for example, might almost be considered retrograde'.224 

By the nineteenth century, the issue of ensuring privacy, particularly in the domestic 

domain of the middle class, was specific. This echoed Ruskin's concern, largely adopted by 

the middle class, that family space be a refuge and a sanctuary, apart from the household 

Robin Evans, Translations from Drawing to Building (1997): 75. 
Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 47-48. 



78 

and the outside world. According to Kerr, it was a 'matter for the architect's care' so much 

so that, in the design of the domestic interior, he instructed that there should be no 

'unrefined arrangements'.225 It was a notion to which attention continued to be paid 

throughout the century. In his volumes published in 1880, Stevenson confirmed Kerr's 

earlier maxim, although he suggested that, rather than an absolute binary division between 

family and servants, the domestic interior should comprise of 'several distinct divisions -

one for the family to live in, another for entertainments - a side for the banquet and a side 

for the household...- besides the division for the servants',226 

It has been noted that, despite their heterogeneity, the nineteenth century middle 

class was unified by their subscription to commonly held values and a sense of a collective 

social identity. One social more to which claimants to middle class status aspired has been 

defined by the historian, F.M.L. Thompson as the 'stereotype of respectability'.227 Under 

the rubric of privacy, the spatial organization of the middle class domestic realm provided a 

means by which the appearance of respectability for the family could be contained within an 

insular and isolated lifestyle, separate from the remainder of the household and apart from 

the rigours and temptations of outside society. With an adherence to a 'respectable' 

domestic life, the middle class created an image of familial 'privacy, propriety and prudery', 

values by which their class was to be identified.228 

2 2 5 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 68. 
226 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol, 7/(1880): 54. 
2 2 7 Thompson, The Rise of Respectable Society (1988): 176. Thompson notes that, even in the homes of 
the least affluent members of the middle class where space was at a premium, privacy was maintained by 
means of territorial space, 'narrowed down to mother's chair and father's chair in the parlour'. 
2 2 8 Ibid. 
Adams in Architecture in the Family Way (1996) suggests that the requirement for comparmentalized 
rooms countered what was perceived as the 'seemingly promiscuous lifestyle' of the French. 'Their 
tradition of interconnected rooms en suite was interpreted in England as an affront to common decency': 
133: 



79 

According to the Foucault, private space allocated to the family unit contributed to 

an image that also became associated with the Victorian middle class. For Foucault, 

confinement (applied, in this case, to the designated private family areas) is tantamount to 

secrecy from which, he argues, emanates notions of restraint and hypocrisy.229 That 

privacy becomes tantamount to secrecy is supported by Griselda Pollock, who suggests that 

the need for secrecy within the family unit evolved with the wish of the landed elite to 

protect their honour and to keep their reputations publicly unsullied.230 

Unlike the landed gentry, elite and long-established in the social order and confident 

in the status and prestige of their family lineage, the newly-arrived nineteenth century 

middle class landowners, with their requirements for domestic privacy, appeared concerned 

with establishing a reputation of respectability as analogous, to their identity. For John 

Walter and his family, as for others who indicated an adherence to nineteenth century 

middle class tenets, the need to present an appearance of an unsullied reputation, of 

respectable propriety, would have nurtured a 'desire for concealment, a predisposition 

towards secrecy'.231 

One arrangement that encroached on the privacy of the family and was a potential 

means by which familial secrets could be breached, was the tradition whereby the domestic 

offices had been located in the basement area. So as to avoid a 'Kitchen window [that] in 

summer weather forms a trap to catch the conversation at the casement of the Drawing 

room', Kerr advised that the domestic offices be distanced in a separate wing.2 3 2 Kerr also 

2 2 9 Foucault, The History of Sexuality (1990): 3. 
2 3 0 Pollock quotes Amussen,v4« Ordered Society (1988): 89 in, "Living on the stage of the world" in 
Wilson, Rethinking Social History (1993). 
2 3 1 Foucault, The History of Sexuality (1990): 89. 
2 3 2 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 68. 



80 

noted that spatial arrangements should be such that family and guests should have 'free 

passageway without encountering the servants unexpectedly'.233 Advocated to ensure the 

privacy of the family, there was also the advantage that such an arrangement would not 

interrupt the efficiency of the servants' work and so not compromise the smooth running of 

the domestic machine. Under the aegis of efficiency and apparent domestic harmony, both 

were important, middle class standards. As Kerr advocated, 'let the servants have access to 

all their duties without coming unexpectedly upon the family or visitors. On both sides this 

privacy is highly valued'.234 

Issues of privacy embraced not only the spatial arrangements of the domestic 

interior, but also the assurance that neither family nor servants overlook the activities of the 

other. For Kerr, these issues of privacy contributed to what he considered to be the 

'salubrity' of domestic arrangements, achieved by judicious architectural planning. 

'Extreme care must...be exercised in the disposition of offensive Apartments and 

Other issues that contributed to the removal of domestic offices from the basement, such as efficiency or 
cooking odours are addressed in Part IV (1.7) & (1.9) respectively. 
A separate wing for the domestic offices had been made possible in the 18th. century when the invention of 

the bell pulley system allowed servants to be out of earshot when summoned. Nash, for instance, was in 
Wales between 1785 and 1796, where he designed country houses, such as Llanerchaeron, with a separate 
domestic wing grouped around a courtyard. Source: Richard Suggett, John Nash, Architect, The National 
Library of Wales: Aberystwyth, Dyfed, 1995. Advances in technology meant that, by the 1840s, speaking 
tubes could be installed. (In the December 11, 1874 issue of The Building News (p. 711) a correspondent 
denigrated the effectiveness of speaking tubes. He wrote that he had 'introduced them freely into the house 
believing they to save much trouble to self and servants, as supplemental to bells'. However, the household 
consensus was that they were 'a bore'.) By 1865, electric bells were in use and, by 1876, in-house 
telephones had been installed, both of which allowed the domestic offices to be distanced from the main 
house. Speaking tubes and in-house telephones were the most efficient as they saved the servants from 
having to make two journeys to undertake a task. 
2 3 3 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 68. 
2 3 4 Ibid. The demand for privacy, to be achieved, in part, by separating family from servants, was a 
particularly British requirement that was not echoed to the same extent by Continental middle class 
families. The latter continued the tradition of living in closer contact with their servants than did the 
English. Stevenson pointed out that maxims to separate family and servants as advocated by such as Kerr 
were particularly appropriate to the 'freedom of disposition of country houses' rather than to the 'restriction 
of town sites'. House Architecture, Vol. II (1880): 54. 



81 

Outbuildings' he noted.235 At Bear Wood, he was careful that all outdoor domestic 

activities were screened by the wing of the domestic offices. Windows were set high on the 

side of the servants' wing that overlooked the entrance courtyard.236 

In the main part of a country house like Bear Wood, designed to accommodate 

middle class requirements for domestic privacy, the compartmentalization of space into 

separate, enclosed areas, to be entered through doorways, often approached via a vestibule 

area, ensured a measure of seclusion for the occupants. That the middle class would have 

considered the 'charms' of 'solitude' desirable and appropriate to their identity was 

confirmed by Stevenson, who noted, the 'opportunity for retirement...has charms only for 

those with internal mental resources', not for 'uneducated people'.237 

The way in which the public rooms could be accessed accommodated what 

Stevenson endorsed as 'our love of seclusion and retirement [so that] each room must be 

isolated'.238 As Robin Evans notes, in many nineteenth century houses, privacy was 

achieved by the 'favoured alternative...the terminal room, with only one strategically placed 

door info the rest of the house', even though architects such as Kerr appeared aware that 

such an arrangement could often be impractical or inconvenient.239 The concept of limited 

access to rooms was a departure from the multiple access doors often installed in one room 

2 3 5 Kerr, TheGentleman's House (1865): 79. 
2 3 6 That servants be invisible to family has been much documented. For example, work in the public rooms 
had to be completed before family or guests descended, hence the very early start to the working day for 
domestic staff. F.M.L. Thompson notes that servants in some households, if unexpectedly encountered by 
family or guests in the main part of the house, were expected to face the wall, with the most extreme 
example being that a servant would be fired if encountered by the family. The Rise of Respectable Society 
(1988): 156. 
2 3 7 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 77(1880): 3. 
2 3 8 Ibid.: 48. 
2 3 9 Evans, Translations from Drawing to Building(1997): 63. Franklin states that Kerr disapproved of the 
plan for Mentmore in that the ladies could be trapped in the boudoir with its terminal placement off the 
drawing room. The Gentleman's Country House (1981): 138. 



82 

in the eighteenth century, particularly when required to fulfil the rules of symmetry then 

governing spatial planning. In nineteenth century Bear Wood, the public rooms were 

grouped around a central gallery with access limited to each room either by one door, or 

through a vestibule, or from a corridor. It was a system that accommodated what 

Stevenson was to refer to in House Architecture as a 'characteristic of modern planning'.240 

'We must', noted Stevenson, 'have a separate communication to each room'.2 4 1 The 

resultant more enclosed spaces formed a matrix in which circulation space was unified and 

direct, a departure from the open and extended thoroughfare rooms in houses built in 

previous centuries. 

Whereas the spatial organization of the public rooms in earlier country houses was 

designed to indulge the aesthetic sensibilities whilst traversing the enfilade, the enclosed 

space of the public rooms in a nineteenth century country house like Bear Wood 

accommodated a more intimate and private form of entertainment. Even within these 

enclosed spaces, a further requirement for intimacy and privacy was preferable. As 

Stevenson advised, the drawing room, for instance, should 'have a number of separate 

centres, such as deep window recesses or a couple of fireplaces' so allowing the occupants 

to form into 'separate groups' for more intimate interaction.242 Such advice reflected 

middle class notions of the home, notions that had been propounded by Ruskin as a private 

place of sanctuary and refuge.243 At Bear Wood, the privacy allowed by a limited access to 

Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 77(1880): 47. 
The compartmentalization of space extended beyond the domestic realm, to be evident in public institutions, 
for example. This indicates the pervasiveness of middle class values into the social order. 
2 4 1 Ibid. 
2 4 2 Ibid: 58 & 57. 
2 4 3 Ruskin alludes to this in both Sesame and Lilies and The Queen of the Air. 



83 

rooms provided the Walter family with the means by which they could put the ideal of 

domestic privacy into practice. 

A survey of plans of country houses built during the nineteenth century indicates 

that the specific designation of private space for the family unit was commonplace, both in 

houses designed for middle class owners, as well as in those being remodelled for the 

aristocracy.244 In fact, such was the importance evidently attached to the provision of 

separate accommodation for the family that a private wing or suite in a country house was 

to become a stock essential in the homes of the affluent, an arrangement referred to by 

Stevenson as a 'separate little house with its own stairs'.245 Perhaps the most extreme 

provision for family privacy was implemented at Eaton Hall, remodelled by Alfred 

Waterhouse circa 1870 for the Duke of Westminster.246 Waterhouse was to ensure that the 

ducal family enjoyed maximum privacy: he provided them with a separate and completely 

self-contained house attached to the main part of Eaton Hall. By 1870, when Waterhouse 

undertook the remodelling of the house, it was evident that middle class requirements for 

domestic privacy had permeated the aristocratic lifestyle. It was also apparent that certain 

middle class tenets of domestic felicity had been adopted: for instance, whenever the Duke 

returned, the carillon in the clock tower at Eaton Hall played "Home Sweet Home"247 

2 4 4 The plans surveyed are in Franklin, The Gentleman's Country House (1981) and iii Harris, The 
Architect and the British Country House (1985). 
2 4 5 In the 19th. century, William Burn (1789-1870) was probably the first architect of country houses to 
ensure that private, family space was allocated. Stoke Rochford, designed in 1839 for the middle class 
Tumor family, incorporated such space. 
Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7/(1880): 54. 
2 4 6 Alfred Waterhouse (1830-1908). 
2 4 7 Girouard, The Victorian Country House (1971): 2. The influence of middle class domestic values 
reached court circles. On July 4,1872, Queen Victoria noted in her journal that prima donna Adelina 
Path's musical rendering of "Home Sweet Home" was 'touching beyond measure'. Nevill, Life in the Court 
of Queen Victoria (1984): 82. 



84 

In 1865, at Bear Wood, Kerr had expressed, in architectural form, provisions for 

familial privacy within the domestic interior and had put into practice what he had advised in 

The Gentleman's House. He delegated private, second floor space for the Walter family, to 

be entered through an ante room with an interconnecting family bedroom, boudoir, bath 

room and gentleman's dressing room. Opposite was the school room and adjacent, along 

the corridor, was the nursery suite. On the floor immediately above the family suite were 

the young ladies' rooms, connected by the young ladies' staircase. Distinctly separated and 

protected from the public areas on the main floor and on the opposite side of the house 

from the main entrance, these family rooms positioned the inhabitants of these private areas 

within a'depth into space'. 

The architect, Thomas Markus suggests that such a designation of space separates 

private and public realms and so divides a building into two categories of people, 

'inhabitants' and 'visitors', with the former having an investment in power as the 

'coritrollers'; the latter, as subjects of the system and not freely able to penetrate into the 

'depth of space', the 'controlled'.248 This division was also evident in the space allocated to 

the titular head of the household for estate business. At Bear Wood, the entrance or 

waiting room provided direct access from the exterior to the gentleman's room, so 

preventing outside 'visitors' from entering the interior spaces of the house. 

Such a designation of space was also evident in the public arena. In institutions like 

hospitals, asylums or prisons, for example, the inhabitants were sequestered within the 

depth of space, with 'controllers' situated at the approach to the interior supervising access 

by visitors. In both domestic and public contexts, the 'controllers' were located in a 

Markus, Buildings & Power (1993): 14. 



85 

position of power. Whether the 'controllers' be located within the depth of private space, 

or in a 'controlling' position at the approach to the interior, both arrangements underscore 

the notion that private space be protected. At the same time, however, the intention was 

that the strength, the power and the concomitant status of those in control be 

demonstrated. 

The spatial organization in Bear Wood might be used to explain the motivations of 

John Walter. Eulogized by his. heir as a man, 'marked' by the 'qualities of sobriety, 

sagacity, independence, unswerving honesty of purpose, and disinterested devotion to the 

public welfare', John Walter epitomized many of the qualities that represented nineteenth 

century middle class tenets, a primary one of which was a predisposition that private, family 

space be integrated into the domestic interior.249 

2 4 9 Dictionary of National Biography, Walter, John. (1818-1894): 716. 
At the end of the citation is written, '[Personal knowledge; the authorities cited in the text; information 
communicated by Mr. Arthur F. Walter.] J.R.T.'. Arthur Walter was the second son and heir of John 
Walter. With Arthur's contribution to the citation, it can be presumed that the family adhered to many of 
the values on which the identity of the 19fh. century middle class was established. In line with general 
middle class political right wing leanings, John Walter was noted as having been 'nominally a conservative, 
though a free-trader [in line with middle class entrepreneurialism] and virtually a Peelite...his political 
faith.. .was that of a liberal-conservative': 714. 



86 

PART IV 
T H E DOMESTIC INTERIOR 

(4.5) The issue of gender-specific space 

Provisions for privacy in the domestic interior required an increasingly more distinct 

separation of the private from the public areas. This was not only specifically 

accommodated in the spatial organization of houses such as Bear Wood, but it also allowed 

for the implementation of what, by the mid-nineteenth century, Was considered to be the 

'natural' separation between the female and male spheres in both public and private realms. 

In the middle class social order, this 'natural' separation deemed the public arena outside 

the home to be that of the male, 'the seat of masculine enterprise and activity'.250 This was 

in contrast to the private, domestic realm, 'the proper location of women and children' in 

which they were expected to operate.251 In the words of Ruskin: 

The man's power is active, progressive, defensive. He is eminently the doer, 
the creator, the discoverer, the defender. His intellect is for speculation and 
invention; his energy for adventure, for war, and for conquest...252 

Historian, Catherine Hall notes that women had an equally defined role: 

While middle-class ideologies stressed the moral and managerial 
aspects of womanhood.. .wives.. .were to provide moral inspiration 
and manage the running of their households.. . 2 5 3 

2 5 0 Groenewegen, ed., Feminism and Political Economy in Victorian England\\99A): Barbara Caine, 
"Feminism and Political Economy in Victorian England - or John Stuart Mill, Henry Fawcett and Henry 
SidgwickPonder the 'Woman Question"':38. 
2 5 1 Ibid. 
2 5 2 Ruskin, Sesame and Lilies (1887): 135 & 136. 
2 5 3 Hall, White, Male and Middle Class (1992): 145. 
Ruskin's notion of the woman as helpmeet to her husband was also represented in other ways. For instance, 
the artist George Hicks painted a triptych, Woman's Mission in 1863 in which the devoted wife performs the 
duty of her expected by society and conforms to contemporary middle class standards of domesticity. Ref: 
Macleod, Art and the Victorian Middle Class (1996): 216. 



87 

The division of the genders had, according to Hall, been considerably influenced in 

the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries by philosophers, such as Hobbes and 

Locke, both of whom considered the foundation of the social order to be the 'male-headed 

family'.254 Added to this was the 'powerful influence' of Rousseau who saw the 'nuclear 

family and patriarchy as natural'.255 Hence, as the nineteenth century progressed, the 

position of women, seen in Rousseauian terms as 'physical and sensual, deficient in 

rationality and incapable of rational thought' became increasingly marginalized from the 

public, political sphere,256 That these public and private realms were to be perceived as 

gender-specific was furthered by the first Reform Act in 1832 which, according to Hall, had 

corrfirmed men as 'responsible political subjects', while 'women were largely condemned to 

public silence'.257 

The isolation of women from the public sphere had taken place as the Industrial 

Revolution had increasingly moved the operation of business away from the domestic realm 

and so lessened their interaction with the public arena. It was a process that corresponded 

with the emergence of an expanding middle class aimed at estabhshing a political and 

cultural identity by which its values could be recognized. The isolation of middle class 

women from the public arena was furthered in that they were not required to undertake 

productive employment necessary for the family budget, hence the nineteenth century 

middle class woman became increasingly invisible to outside society. The degree of leisure 

and isolation afforded the female family members were a means by which the status of the 

2 5 4 Hall, White, Male and Middle Class (1992): 155. 
2 5 5 Ibid. 

Ibid. 
2 5 7 Ibid: 145. 



88 

family could be exemplified. Consequently, the seclusion of women within the domestic 

domain became a significant means by which the nineteenth century middle class could not 

only advertise its identity, but an identity that was separate and apart, particularly from that 

of the working classes.259 

Confined, constrained and protected within the private, domestic realm and subject 

to the legal autonomy of the patriarchal head of the household, middle class women were 

left with no formal political voice, no economic autonomy of any significance, no formal 

place iri the public sphere. This was affirmed by the influential opinions of such as John 

Stuart Mill, who presumed that women were not 'independent adults, able to safeguard 

their own interests'.260 Instead, a woman claiming middle class status became invested with 

an identity that positioned her as custodian of the domestic citadel, as 'The Angel iri the 

House' 2 6 1 Social critics, such as Ruskin had been influential in placing the mantle of the 

nurturing, maternal female, reverent and dutiful wife, on the shoulders of middle class 

women.262 Ruskin likened them to the mythical Greek goddess, Athena. Traditionally 

regarded as the Goddess of Wisdom, Ruskin perceived Athena as 'the directress of human 

passion, resolution and labour'.263 For Ruskin, the 'power' of the woman inside the 

This provided a means by which gradations of rank, based on sources and degrees of income, could be 
established within the middle class. 
2 5 9 Towards the end of the century, such as department stores provided a means by which middle class 
women could interact in the public realm with other women of their class outside the immediate domestic 
sphere. 
2 6 0 Groenewegen, ed., Feminism and Political Economy in Victorian England (1994): Barbara Caine, 
"Feminism and Political Economy in Victorian England - or John Stuart Mill, Henry Fawcett and Henry 
SidgwickPonder the 'Women Question'": 33. 
John Stuart M i l l , 1806-1873, English philosopher and economist. 
2 6 1 In Sesame and Lilies (1887) Ruskin refers to the 1854 poem by Coventry Patmore (1823-1896) "The 
Angel in the House": 140-141. 
2 6 2 In Sesame & Lilies, Ruskin acknowledged that he was writing for 'people belonging to the upper, or 
undistressed middle, classes'. Preface: x. 
2 6 3 Ruskin, Queen of the Air (1887): 121. Ruskin's concept of Athena reflected a specifically Victorian 
definition. 
Ruskin, Sesame and Lilies (1887): 136. 



89 

domestic realm was 'not for invention or creation, but for sweet ordering, arrangement and 

decision'.264 To Ruskin, the home should be the 'woman's true place and power', a place 

in which she 'must be enduringly, incorruptibly good; instinctively, infallibly wise'.2 6 5 She 

was to be both icon and example, selflessly devoted to the virtue of the family, the epitome, 

in fact, of nineteenth century middle class values. 

In architectural terms, the demarcation between the public and the private is evident 

in a survey of the floor plans of contemporary country houses, of which Bear Wood is an 

example. Not only does the plan of Bear Wood distinctly separate the two realms, but it 

also clearly indicates gender-specific areas for both family members and servants. This 

distinct demarcation of space, evident along gender-designated lines, confirms that the 

perceived 'natural' separation between male and female realms in the social order was 

replicated within the middle class home, providing a means by which many middle class 

ideas of privacy and the attendant maintenance of moral integrity and propriety, could be 

sustained within the domestic interior. 

That Kerr subscribed to and supported this notion of a 'natural' separation between 

the male and the female spheres of life is evident, both in his theoretical advice and in his 

actual application of these ideas to the design of the domestic interior. Taking the principal 

staircase as an example, he deemed it should be central, yet private and 

...afford direct passage, for the ladies in particular, from the Public rooms 
to the Bedrooms; and secondly, the access from the Entrance ought to be 
equally direct, for the ladies again, when coming from out of doors, 
- so that they may not have to pass through any great extent of 
interior thoroughfare...The Principal Staircase, as a rule in any good house, 
is understood to be closed against the passage up and down of the servants.266 

2 6 4 Ruskin, Sesame and Li/ies (1887): 136. 
2 6 5 Ibid.: 138. 
2 6 6 Kerr, The Gentieman's House (1865): 176. 



90 

Despite affording the ladies a 'direct passage' 'when coming from out of doors', the 

principal staircase was, according to Kerr, to be considered as 'no more than an ascent to 

the Sleeping-rooms of the Main House'.2 6 7 This was in contrast to the previous centuries 

when the principal staircase, as part of the primary route by which the house was entered, 

had been a significant and very public architectural feature that connected the main entrance 

to the public rooms located on the piano noble floor 2 6 8 So important and so significant 

was this staircase, used by family and guests of both genders, that it was not uncommon for 

heraldic devices to be integrated into this very public approach to the public rooms in the 

house. At Knole, for instance, the enlargement of the house in 1603 incorporated a 

principal staircase, the newel posts of which supported carved leopards, each holding a 

shield painted with the coat of arms of the Sackville family, as public harbingers of the 

status of the owner and to add resonance to the family name. At eighteenth century 

Holkham, the approach to the public rooms was also intended to be impressive. William 

Kent designed the marble staircase leading from the rustic to the state rooms to be set inside 

a 'theatrical encircling colonnade, owing something to the Vitruvian-Palladian basilica in the 

Barbara Vitruvius' that served not only as a dramatic and awe-inspiring means of access to 

2 6 7 Ibid. Contemporaries considered that Kerr paid only scant attention to the details of planning in some 
areas, of which the staircase was one. In the January 7, 1865 issue of The Builder noted, 'staircase-
planning, the subject of distinct works by other authors, must be considered as quite inadequately treated...' 
Despite his theoretical advice and, unlike many of his architectural peers, Kerr did not provide a separate 
staircase for the family at Bear Wood, so it must be presumed that the Principal stair was intended for adult 
family members, as well as for guests. In The Gentleman's House, Kerr refers to a 'Mansion' in 
'Berkshire'. He does not name the mansion but the floorplan (with a few minor changes, such as the 
omission of the lamp room, indicating the Garden entrance hallway as a saloon, as well as a plan for a 
conservatory) is identical to Bear Wood. Kerr refers to the bachelors' stair as a 'peculiarity': 451. Perhaps 
it was that Walter demanded this bachelors' stair at Bear Wood, rather than the more usual separate family 
staircase. 
2 6 8 In the 16th. and 17th. centuries, there had been an ascending hierarchy with interior space, with the 
servants on the main floor, the family on the second and the rooms of state on the third. Such an 
arrangement was used, for example, at Hardwick Hall (c. 1580) and Chatsworth (c. 1686). 



91 

the public rooms, but also referenced the learned status of the owner.269 At Kedleston, 

Robert Adam designed a double exterior staircase to approach the piano noble under a 

porticoed entrance topped with classical statuary. In all such cases, the intention was that 

the principal stair be a very public and impressive means by which to introduce both genders 

to the prestige of the owner as they entered the interior of the house. 

By the nineteenth century, the public rooms in country houses were generally 

located on the main floor, thus negating the need for a principal stair to provide a significant 

approach. However, for Kerr, this staircase still retained, as he noted, 'enough importance 

to render it one of the chief features of plan', presumably a reflection of middle class values 

for, as he stated, 'in some respects it even gains in characteristic value, by being associated 

exclusively with the privacy of the Sleeping rooms'.270 No longer a means by which to 

publicly access the interior, the staircase was now considered significant in terms of middle 

class ideals in that it provided a secluded route by which ladies, in particular, could access 

the most private, intimate spaces of the house. In fact, at Bear Wood, Kerr distanced the 

principal staircase discretely out of sight from the main entrance, to be approached through 

an entry vestibule, across an entrance hall and through an oak screen. Contrary to his 

maxim that it be no more than a means to approach the Sleeping-rooms, Kerr gave this 

staircase notable architectural importance with a well and balustrades of carved oak that 

rose through three stories, to be crowned by a gilded gallery. Above this, light filtered 

down through stars scattered over golden-coloured glass, perhaps in reference to Ruskin's 

perception of the intrinsic value of the woman in the home when he wrote of her that 'the 

Harris, The Architect and the British Country House (1985): 132. 
Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 176. 



91a 



92 

stars only may be over her head'.271 In Queen of the Air, Ruskin wrote of Athena in the 

Heavens wearing a 'robe of light, saffron colour', suggesting an analogy with the golden 

light filtering down the staircase of Bear Wood. 2 7 2 Hence, this principal stair, dedicated 

for use by the ladies, both family and guests, was a means by which the separation of public 

from private spheres in the domestic interior of a middle class household could be 

emphasized. At the same time, however, and in line with the diversity with which the 

middle class appeared to present itself, the architectural significance given to the principal 

staircase in Bear Wood indicates that it was also intended to be a statement that 

underscored both the status and the prestige of the Walter family. 

Further, in order to separate the genders within the domestic interior, there was the 

young ladies' stair that connected their apartments directly to those of their parents'. The 

Bachelors' spiral stair inside a tower in the angle of the principal staircase combined notions 

of propriety with practicality in that, as Kerr noted, 'single men can reach their rooms, from 

perhaps dirty weather outside, without using the chief thoroughfares'.273 In the domestic 

wing, the male and female servants were appointed separate staircases that lead to their 

rooms on separate floors, as well as to their gender-designated corridor routes. For general 

convenience, Kerr advised there should be a 'Backstairs, running from the bottom to the top 

of the house' so as to take the 'traffic of servants when carrying out their duties, [as well as] 

all Nursery traffic' and 'a great deal of family traffic which avoids the Principal Staircase for 

the sake of privacy'.274 It was an idea undertaken at Bear Wood. 

2 7 1 Ruskin, Sesame and Lilies (1887): 138. 
2 7 2 Ruskin, Queen of the Air (1887). Considering that this work was 'begun thirty-five years ago', it is 
entirely possible that such as Kerr could have been influenced by Ruskin by the time Bear Wood was begun 
in 1865. 
2 7 3 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 177. 
2 7 4 Ibid: 177-178. 



93 

In Bear Wood, it can be seen that Kerr's allocation of stair and corridor routes 

between family and servants, between male and female, not only accommodated middle 

class requirements for privacy, but also accommodated that 'natural' separation between the 

genders. This separation of male from female realms within the domestic interior extended 

further. For instance, space allocated to male family and guests was very specific, whereby 

Kerr provided a suite of rooms for their use. Included in this suite was the library, next to 

which was the somewhat ambivalently-designated gentleman's room (or library) off of 

which was the billiard room (or gentleman's room) and the deed room. Adjacent to the 

billiard room was a separate entrance waiting room, a discrete space for the operation of 

estate business, presumably to be undertaken by the male.275 The position of the billiard 

room at Bear Wood, a room deemed by Stevenson as 'an essential of most country houses, 

as a means of killing time on wet days', should be sited so that 'men may be at their ease in 

it smoking and playing in their shirt-sleeves, and to drown the knocking of the balls'.2 7 6 

However, it would appear that, at the time Bear Wood was built, the game of billiards was 

not always the exclusive prerogative of the male in that it could also be enjoyed by the 

ladies. To accommodate this, Stevenson noted that, instead of a separate, male-designated 

room, 'a billiard-table is placed in the hall, where it is convenient for a pastime, and for the 

ladies joining in the game'.277 This appeared to be a rather unsuitable alternative, for 

Stevenson added that 'to regular players...this arrangement is not satisfactory...it renders 

smoking impossible, else the house would be filled with tobacco fumes, while the exposure 

2 7 5 Allocation of space in which estate business could be conducted contributed to the image that many 
19th century owners wished to convey, that is, a business-like concern for the operation of their land. 

2 7 6 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7/(1880): 62. 
2 7 7 Ibid: 63. Although House Architecture was published in 1880, it should be recalled that Stevenson 
'began this book ten years ago': Preface: v. 



94 

to every caller prevents playing in shirt-sleeves.278 Despite allowances for any compromise, 

it would appear that the billiard room was essentially considered a male preserve. 

There appeared to be no compromise in other spaces included in the suite of rooms 

at Bear Wood intended for masculine use. Kerr noted that the gun room, for example, was 

'indispensable to a Country-House of any pretensions, as a depository for sporting 

implements'.279 There was little doubt about the gender-designation for the gentlemen's 

odd room. Not only did Kerr consider its as 'useful for miscellaneous purposes' but, 'in the 

country more especially, the young gentlemen of the house may find themselves very much 

at a loss sometimes for an informal place in which "to do as they like'". 2 8 0 Opposite the 

butler' s,rooms and adjacent to the working space allocated the footmen, the location of the 

odd room at Bear Wood exactly fitted Kerr's maxims in that it 'ought to be out of the Main 

House, and not directly amongst the Offices: near the Butler's-Pantry will do; and next the 

Gun-room will be exactly right'.2 8 1 Likewise, there was little doubt about who should 

occupy the smoking room, a room which, according to Stevenson was necessitated by 

'modern habits'.282 Bear Wood appears to be the exception, rather than the rule, in that the 

floor plan does not indicate a smoking room. During the course of the nineteenth century, 

space specifically allocated for smoking became increasingly integrated into the domestic 

interior as part of the male domain 2 8 3 Kerr confirmed the purpose of the smoking room by 

noting: 

2 7 8 Ibid. 
2 7 9 Ibid: 229. 
2 8 0 Ibid. 
2 8 1 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 130. 
282 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7/(1880): 64. 
One of the first specific spaces for smoking in the domestic interior - the Smoking Room - had been 
instituted by Victoria and Albert when Osborne House was built in 1843. 
2 8 3 In The Gentleman's House, Kerr offers advice on the Smoking room, on its 'position, access, prospect 
and ventilation'. There are numerous instances of space being designated for this increasingly popular 



95 

The pitiable resources to which some gentlemen are driven, even in then-
own houses, in order to enjoy the pestiferous luxury of a cigar, have 
given rise to the occasional introduction of an apartment specially 
dedicated to the use of Tobacco.284 

Whether a separate space, or incorporated into other male-designated space, such as the 

billiard room, Kerr instructed that consideration be given to prospect, so that the smoking 

room 'should be a good one, and well got up. In short, it ought to be a charming chatting -

room with smoking allowed'.285 

This specific association of space with the masculine had, by the nineteenth century, 

been appropriated to the dining room, a connotation that was particularly compounded at 

Bear Wood in a north-facing room solidly encased in carved English oak.286 The sense of 

gravity and massiveness effected by this room might be seen as an affirmation of its 

association with the masculine, particularly when considered in contrast to the connotations 

of femininity implied by Kerr's directives that 'lightness' be sought for a south or west 

facing drawing room, directives later endorsed by Stevenson who advocated 'an abundance 

of light' for the drawing room 2 8 7 In the north-facing dining room at Bear Wood, the 

masculine ambience was further compounded, not only by its massiveness and solidity, but 

activity in other 19th. century country houses. At Cardiff Castle, remodelled from 1868 onwards by 
William Burges for Lord Bute, the provision of space for smoking reached what might considered to be its 
apotheosis, with both winter and summer smoking rooms installed in the tower designed as a bachelor suite. 
Source:. Girouard, The Victorian Country House (1971): 127. 
2 8 4 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 129. 
2 8 5 Ibid: 130. 
At the contemporary country house of Brodsworth Hall, where the billiard room was also designated as the 
smoking room, 'two large ventilation hatches' had to be installed to provide adequate ventilation. English 
Heritage: Brodsworth Hall (1995): 19. 
2 8 6 Kerr paid particular attention to 'aspect and prospect' in The Gentleman's House. He included a 
diagram of an Aspect Compass under which was: 'Note. - Throughout the whole treatise, when questions 
of aspect are under consideration, this diagram will serve for the illustration of the argument': 81. 
In addition, there was an element of practicality in the dining room facing north so that, as Stevenson put it, 
' the sun does not shine in on the guests at meals, necessitating the closing of the blinds'. House 
Architecture, Vol. II (1880): 56. 
2 8 7 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 107. 
Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7/(1880): 58. 



96 

by a full length portrait of John Walter firmly built into the wall above the fireplace, perhaps 

to signify an association between the middle class associations of paterfamilias with the 

domestic hearth.288 

Conversely, the drawing room, interconnected to the morning room at Bear Wood 

was, as Kerr noted, the 'Lady's Apartment essentially', as was the boudoir in the family 

suite on the first floor.2 8 9 In contrast to the masculine associations appropriated to the 

dining room, the drawing room was considered a feminine domain, for Kerr directed that its 

'character' be 'always aimed' at 'especial cheerfulness, refinement of elegance, and what is 

called lightness as opposed to massiveness...to be entirely ladylike''}90 Drawing room, 

morning room and boudoir all had bay windows and were positioned to catch the afternoon 

or evening sun, 'so that the ladies may enjoy the most free and direct communication with 

the open air'.2 9 1 Kerr paid attention to this space allocated to the ladies, not only to the 

'rule that in everything is this...to be entirely ladylike', but also that the windows, 'generally 

2 8 8 Some 10 feet high and 8 feet wide, this portrait remains in situ. It is interesting to compare this portrait 
to the one painted in 1880 of William Armstrong . Walter stands in formal dress, his hand resting on a 
copy of The Times, a bust of his father on the table. It is a full-length portrait (traditionally associated with 
royalty or the aristocracy) in a pose that reflects portraits intended to affirm the status and prestige of the 
sitter. In contrast, the pose adopted in the portrait of Armstrong was intended to illustrate the ideals of 
domesticity, the way in which the middle class wished to be identified. 
It is interesting to note that Armstrong also chose to identify himself with in the dining room, thus 
indicating that the association of that space with the masculine had continued. 
The masculine association appropriated to the dining room probably resulted from the 18th. century 
tradition whereby the men remained in the dining room following dinner to allow the ladies to retire to the 
'with-drawing' room to make tea, recentiy introduced as an expensive and novel commodity. Hence, the 
concurrent association of the drawing room as the female domain. 
2 8 9 Of the boudoir, Stevenson wrote: 'The private room of the lady house is called the BOUDOIR (from 
boudoir, to pout), being apparentiy destined in French houses to the very commendable purpose of allowing 
ill-humour to be got rid of in private.' Its use in 19th. century England was evidently perceived to be of a 
more domestic and practical nature, for Stevenson continued, 'We rather picture an English lady in her 
retirement engaged in settling her household accounts, in reading, music, sewing, or worsted work.' House 
Architecture, Vol. II (1880): 62. 
2 9 0 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 107. Although there was this tacit assumption that the drawing 
room was the female domain, it was used by males (by implied invitation) for certain social rituals, such as 
afternoon tea, or in the evenings. 
2 9 1 Ibid: 107. 



97 

formed as casements' should open on the Lawn, Flower-Garden, or Terrace'.292 Such a 

reference suggests that Kerr integrated, in architectural form, nineteenth century 

perceptions that associated the feminine with nature. As noted, it was a notion evident in 

the work of contemporary writers, of which Ruskin was, perhaps, pre-eminently influential. 

In Sesame and Lilies, for instance, he reinforced the association of the feminine with nature 

with a quotation taken from Coventry Patmore's poem, "The Angel in the House ": 

Three years she grew in sun and shower, 
Then Nature said, ' A lovelier flower 

On earth was never sown... ' 2 9 3 

To further this association, in Queen of the Air, Ruskin likened the goddess Athena to a 

'mythical expression of natural phenomena', analogous to the 'ambient air, which included 

all cloud, and rain, and dew...'2 9 4 

As an architectural expression of this notion, it would appear that a conservatory, 

although one was never actually constructed at Bear Wood, also served to underscore the 

prevalent mid-nineteenth century correlation between female-designated space and 

nature 2 9 5 As Kerr stated in The Gentleman's House, the 'intercommunication most usual 

for a Conservatory is with either the Drawing-room, Boudoir, or Morning-room', leaving 

little doubt of the inherent connection between a space designed to house plants and flowers 

and that specifically designated for feminine use. 

For the servants, space was not only allocated along gender-designated lines but, as 

has been noted, was also specifically task-related. Both designations can be regarded as a 

2 9 2 Ibid: 107 & 109. 
2 9 3 Ruskin, Sesame and Lilies (1887): 140. 
2 9 4 Ruskin, Queen of the Air (1887): vii & 48. 
2 9 5 Based on his plan for a 'Mansion in Berkshire', in The Gentleman's House (1865): 451, it would 
appear that Kerr had originally planned a conservatory to the west of the house, to be entered through an 
ante-room, from the north bay of the drawing room. It was never built. 



98 

means by which the sexual vulnerability of females could be protected, a precaution that 

was of particular concern to the middle class in the nineteenth century.296 This was 

recognized by Kerr who advised that 'ordinary' female domestics should share bedroom 

space of 'small size, suitable for not more than two persons'.297 To further protect the 

vulnerabUity of the 'ordinary female domestics', Kerr suggested that they be under the 

watchful eye of the housekeeper so that the 'Housekeepers Bedroom...ought sometimes to 

be situated, not exactly amongst the apartments of the women, but rather so as to command 

the whole of them'...298 This, however, was a maxim that he did not actually follow at Bear 

Wood, where the housekeeper's room was located further along the corridor from both the 

rooms allocated to female domestics and the women's stair.299 Kerr inferred no such 

arrangement was required for the 'ordinary men-servants' in order to protect their 

vulnerability. He did, however, advocate that 'each man ought properly to have a separate 

room; or otherwise...to divide a large dormitory into small compartments or boxes by board 

partitions'.300 This suggests, not only middle class notions of morality, but that in providing 

even rudimentary privacy, the male servants were perceived to be more superior in the 

domestic hierarchy: In addition, as F.M.L. Thompson points out, in contrast to the former 

arrangement wherein the daily life of servants had been contained in attic and basement 

The number of women employed as domestic servants had increased in proportion to the decline, from 
the 16th. century onwards, in the prestige associated with the work. Larger households, such as country 
houses, maintained a higher proportion of male servants than did the smaller households of the less 
affluent. In 1851, 28% of female servants were under the age of 20. Briggs, Victorian Things (1988): 256. 
2 9 7 Ibid: 250. 
Dormitory space for domestics had, by the nineteenth century, been 'regarded with suspicion and got rid of. 
Girouard, Life in the English Country House (1978): 276. 
2 9 8 Ibid: 251. 
Franklin notes that a similar example, whereby this maxim to protect the vulnerability of female domestics 
was not followed was at Mentmore, where the housemaids' room was placed between that for the footman 
and the men's staircase. The Gentleman's Country House (1981): 139. 
2 9 9 The arrangement that the housekeeper's room should command the housemaids' corridor can, however, 
be seen at Brodsworth. 



9 9 

rooms, the architectural expression of a separate servants' wing allowed for more space that 

could be corhpatmentalized.301 

the objective to separate the genders by the provision of more private space 

affected the quotidian working life of the servants in a country house such as Bear Wood. 

It has been noted that work assigned to either male or female was intended to be undertaken 

in compartmentalized, task-specific space, with the objective that both efficiency and moral 

rectitude be maintained. In gender-neutral space, such as the servants' hall, where meals 

and leisure time were taken, it was presumed that the presence of other servants would 

provide adequate chaperonage, although, even here, the genders were often separated, with 

men seated down one side of the table and women down the other. 

These principles of the division and compartmentalization of space, or the separation 

of the genders were to be found in the general structure of society. Throughout the 

nineteenth century, there had been an ongoing propensity for the government to be divided 

into departments, prisoners separated and compartmentalized according to their gender or 

crimes, hospital and asylum patients into wards, again depending on either gender or the 

nature of their ailment. Such a separation and division between the genders meant that any 

limitations of interaction were accommodated and enforced by the spatial organization of 

the facility, thus also avoiding the possibility of moral or physical contagion. Whether in the 

public arena, or in the domestic interior, the objective was that spatial organization was a 

means by which moral laxity could be prevented, with the anticipated result that the moral 

3 0 0 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 250. Presumably to maintain propriety, or an element of privacy, 
Ken-instructed that each partition be'six or seven feet high'. 
3 0 1 F.M.L. Thompson, The Rise of Respectable Society (1988): 156. 
Thompson also notes that, where space was less plentiful, such as in urban areas, or in the homes of the less 
wealthy, servants continued to be accommodated in attics and basements and that the use of space remained 
more communal and less compartmentalized. 



i o o 

management of the individual could be enforced and middle class standards of propriety 

maintained.302 

The spatial organization of a country house like Bear Wood was not only designed 

to assist in the maintenance of proscribed moral standards, but it was also a configuration 

that supported both control and discipline. The specific delegation of space contributed to 

the appearance of the household functioning by an internally-driven, non-coercive 

process.303 Foucault refers to this non-coercive process of discipline and control as being 

manifested by a 'web of power', whereby each individual is encouraged to perceive himself 

as being under the surveillance of and, thus, policed by others.304 Hence, the individual, 

through this non-coercive process, becomes a 'docile body' with consequent internal 

mechanisms of control, subjugated within the social context and, thus, subject to proscribed 

standards of propriety.305 

It is an argument that can be applied to a domestic household like Bear Wood 

where, the spatial organization of a nineteenth century house allowed both the instigation 

and accommodation of middle class values. Although the compartmentalization of this 

domestic interior did not allow for overt surveillance, as did, for example, the kitchens at 

both eighteenth century Kedleston and Harewood, wherein the occupants could be 

observed from balconies overlooking the workspace, the household of Bear Wood would, 

instead, have been subject to discipline and control under the aegis of individual moral 

The gender-neutral space of the servants' hall had evolved towards the end of the 17th. century when 
servants no longer ate in the Great Hall of a country house. 
3 0 3 Briggs notes that the specialization and separation of tasks meant that work was 'learned by doing' 
which, therefore, meant that the worker not only worked in comparative isolation, but also became limited 
to the field of the job. Victorian Things (1988): 256. 
3 0 4 Foucault, The History of Sexuality (1990): 86. 



101 

management. Such a hypothesis is central to Foucault's analysis of the issue of 

surveillance.306 Unlike nineteenth century institutions, such as prisons or hospitals, were 

the occupants were under direct surveillance, the compartmentalization of space, 

particularly in the domestic offices, meant that similar methods were no longer possible.307 

Hence, the individual was expected to exert internal control and discipline. This meant that 

Kerr's delegation of space in Bear Wood, either for gender-specific occupation, or for task-

specific use, would have required a conformity to expected behavioural standards the 

household.308 The delegation of space could, therefore, be seen a means by which a 

seemingly natural, un-coerced solidarity in which each inhabitant accepted a defined role 

and where all the roles were closely related within the spatial organization was in place.309 

As Foucault stated, power is tolerable only on condition that it mask a substantial part of 

itself for its 'success is proportional to its abilities to hide its own mechanisms...'310 

The intended outcome of designating space was to create a social organization that, 

in line with contemporary middle class ideology, appeared orderly, harmonious and 

virtuous. It was a system that demanded, under the auspices of nineteenth century middle 

class Evangelical religious and moral doctrines, such virtues as a compliant obedience 

towards authority, based on expectations that virtue and obedience were the inherent duty 

3 0 6 Foucault, The History of Sexuality (1990): Chapter 3. 
3 0 7 Although there was compartmentalization in institutions, the spatial organization was such that the 
occupants were under direct surveillance. In prisons, for instance, a panoptic layout of the interior allowed 
fortius. 
3 0 8 In the wealthier middle class families, such as the Walter's, boys and young men would have been 
educated outside of the home environment and, thus, not come under the 'web of power' to the same extent 
as other household members. Hence, it might be argued that there was a gendered hierarchy of power, 
particularly in the family unit, with the males dominant over the females. 
3 0 9 Markus compares and contrasts 'organic solidarity' with 'mechanical solidarity'. The latter is a 
relationship in which people are considered independent equals with shared beliefs as, for example, in the 
church. Buildings & Power (1973): 13. 
3 1 0 Foucault, The History of Sexuality (1990): 86. 



102 

of the individual. It also demanded a sense of obligation towards others, often translated by 

the middle class into acts of philanthropy. 

The virtues of the middle class woman, as exemplar good wife, mother, or daughter 

ranged from personifying standards of moral excellence to her social accomplishments. The 

expectations of the female servant included such virtues as industry, frugality, diligence and 

good management.311 Whether family member or servant, a woman in a nineteenth century 

middle class household was expected to function within both the constrictions of such 

virtues and within the confinements of gender-specific space. This reflected a social order 

upheld by Locke, Hobbes and Rousseau, as well as Ruskin, an order based on the middle 

class tenets whereby the 'natural' realm meant a domestic domain sustained by the 

benevolent and paternal discipline of the male titular head of the household.312 

In Sesame and Lilies, Ruskin counselled that the 'woman's true place' was in the 

home.313 In her respective roles of middle class wife and mother, or domestic servant in a 

middle class household, the female could, in carrying out her domestic duties within the 

confinement of the domestic sphere, exemplify the values of familial felicity to which the 

middle class subscribed. Such a system within which the female was expected to exist 

might be understood in terms of Foucault's assertion that sexual repression coincided with 

the development of capitalism, to eventually become an integral part of the bourgeois 

order.314 The division of space in a house such as Bear Wood was, no doubt, intended to 

3 1 1 Hall discusses such virtues in White, Male and Middle Class (1992) Chapter 3. 
3 1 2 Although women were central in the private, domestic sphere, men lived in it and were 'economically 
and legally the dominant ones within the home and family'. Groenewegan, ed., Feminism and Political 
Economy in Victorian England (1994): Groenewegan, "Women in Political Economy and Women as 
Political Economists in Victorian England": 14. ; 
3 1 3 Ruskin, Sesame and Lilies (1887): 138. 
3 1 4 Foucault, The History of Sexuality (1990): 5 & 6. Foucault adjusts the advent of the sexual repression 
of the female to the 17th century and the first stages of the development of capitalism. 



103 

instil 'correct moral, social and religious attitudes'.315 Added to this, the designation of 

gender-specific space contributed to the way in which the nineteenth century middle class 

could present an image of domestic life that was different from that of the working classes. 

It was also a means by which the sexual stereotypes inherent in middle class ideology could 

be reinforced. 

Horn, Ladies of the Manor (1991): 24. 



104 

PART IV 
THE DOMESTIC INTERIOR 

( 4 . 6 ) On the issue of children in the domestic sphere 

During the eighteenth century, the effects of industrialization resulted in a changing 

social order that, at the same time, witnessed a change in attitude towards children. 

According to historian, J.H. Plumb such a change had actually been in effect from the 

beginning of the century. The previous 'dominant social attitude', concerned with 

children's 'relation to God, to their salvation' became, as the eighteenth century progressed, 

an attitude wherein 'socialization rather than salvation became the new aim'.3 1 6 In the 

context of the Enlightenment thought of such as Locke or Rousseau, 'the view of the child' 

became one that, 'given the right environment and the proper course of education, 

compassion and benevolence, the essential goodness of the child would triumph over its 

propensity for evil'. 3 1 7 By the end of the century, this was an attitude towards children that, 

according to Plumb, was 'spreading steadily among the middle and upper classes'.318 

At the same time, as F . M . L . Thompson notes, the increasing emergence of the 

middle class had 'emphasized the importance of class and income differences', both between 

the various stratas of the middle class, as well as within the social order itself.319 By the 

nineteenth century, changes that had been taking place in the previous century in attitudes 

towards children meant that many parents, particularly those who now claimed middle class 

3 1 6 Plumb, "The New World of Children in Eighteenth-century England" i n The Birth of a Consumer 
Society (1982): 286. 
3 1 7 Ibid.: 290. 
3 1 8 Ibid.: 291. 
3 1 9 Thompson, The Rise of Respectable Society (1988): 118. 



105 

status and who were ambitious to establish their identity in the social order, had 'come to 

look upon their children as vehicles of social emulation', as 'counters' in their 'social 

aspirations'.320 A traditional indication of status, long practiced by the aristocracy, had 

been the removal of children from the home to be raised away from the family.321 

However, following the precedent established during the eighteenth century, rather than 

being raised from birth outside of the parental home, children of wealthy families, both 

aristocratic and middle class, were now accommodated within the familial sphere, even 

though they were located apart from the mainstream of daily family life in specifically 

allocated space.322 In the homes of the middle class, this was possible only where space and 

income allowed, so that the ability to provide such accommodation became a means by 

which its members could identify themselves as being socially distinct, both within their own 

class, as well as from the working classes.323 

Nineteenth century attitudes towards children required that, although confined to 

specifically-allocated space, they be located close to the mother. This reflected the middle 

class ethos whereby familial felicity was considered a major component of the domestic 

ideal. It also reflected the role appropriated to the nineteenth century middle class woman 

3 2 0 Ibid.: 292 & 300. Plumb also suggests that children, as vehicles for their parents' social aspirations, 
became a capital investment for parents. 
3 2 1 Thompson discusses aristocratic practices, particularly prevalent until the 19th. century, of employing 
mother-substitutes and putting babies out to wet nurses. Ibid. 
Plumb also cites examples of the children of the wealthy upper classes being raised away from the family 
home. "The New World of Children in Eighteenth-century England" in The Birth of a Consumer Society 
(1982): Chapter Seven. 
322 In. Victorian Women (1993) Perkin indicates that, at the turn of the 18th. century, there was a fashion 
for the aristocracy to adopt some of the emerging middle class tenets of becoming more involved with the 
rearing of their children. A n image of a nursemaid holding a child to the mother is cited: ' A satire of the 
early nineteenth-century fashion amongst women of the beau monde for spending more time with their 
children and even breast feeding'. Ref. Print by James Gillray, "The Fashionable Mamma: the 
Convenience of Modern Dress", Catalogue Reynold, Nicholas Penny, ed., Royal Academy of Art, London, 
1986:393. 
3 2 3 The lack of space in less affluent middle class and working class households precluded separate 
accommodation for children. 



106 

as a personification of contemporary ideals of motherhood. Ruskin regarded that the 

'guiding function of the woman' was to instil in her children the virtues by which her class 

was identified.324 As Plumb notes, such virtues as sobriety, obedience, industry, thrift, 

benevolence and compassion, self-improvement and self-discipline, were those of a 

successful, social man', an ongoing reflection of Enlightenment ideas that represented many 

of the values to which the nineteenth century middle class subscribed.325 

On the subject of space designated for use by children, Robert Kerr codified 

contemporary notions when he stated that, 'as against the principle of the withdrawal of 

children for domestic convenience...the mother will require to have a certain facility of 

access to them'.3 2 6 This meant that children be located apart from the mainstream of the 

household, but with, as Kerr put it, an 'intimate connection to the parents' quarter'.327 This 

attitude was later echoed in Stevenson's 1880 publications although, perhaps with a more 

practical eye towards reality, he noted, 'the nursery department should be shut off from the 

rest of the house; for however interesting children may be, there are times when our 

appreciation of them is increased by their absence'.328 However, as Stevenson concurred, 

'its position should be near the mistress's bedroom'.329 Both Kerr and Stevenson indicated 

that the mandate of the nineteenth century architect was that specific attention be given to 

3 2 4 Ruskin, Sesame and Lilies (1887): 135. 
3 2 5 Plumb, "The New World of Children in Eighteenth-century England" in The Birth of a Consumer 
Society (1981): 290 & 291. 
3 2 6 Kerr,The Gentleman's House (1865): 144. 
3 2 7 Ibid. 
3 2 8 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7/(1880): 70. 
Stevenson's statement was reflected by Adams in Architecture in the Family Way (1996) where she notes 
that, after 1870, experts 'saw such interaction as dangerous and unhealthy. It too closely resembled 
working-class living conditions': 139. 
3 2 9 Ibid: 71. 



107 

the space designated for children, that it be separate from, but near to, that of the mother, 

the whole integrated as part of a private, family suite. 

In country houses built for middle class owners throughout the nineteenth century, 

space allocated for children was located either immediately above, or adjacent to, the family 

suite. A precedent for this was apparent as early as 1840, when William Burn had placed 

the nursery suite at Stoke Rochford Hall immediately above the rooms allocated to the 

parents:330 It was a trend that continued for several more generations. In 1864, Lewis 

Vulliamy, the architect for Westonbirt, located the nurseries over the private rooms of the 

parents to create a specific and separate family wing.3 3 1 Later in the century, it would 

appear that convenience and practicality had become major considerations for, as Stevenson 

advised, the nursery and family suites should 'all be on a level, access to steps or stairs 

being dangerous for young children, arid increasing immensely the trouble of looking after 

them.'332 

At Bear Wood, Kerr had anticipated such considerations and had also responded to 

the mandate that children be in close proximity to the family suite. He placed the nursery 

suite between the family apartment and the rooms allocated to the female domestics. On 

the south front of the first floor, but separated from the family apartments by the back stairs, 

Kerr provided the Walter children with what he called 'self-enclosed' accommodation' with 

a nursery corridor, a night nursery, a day nursery, a room for nurse, a scullery, a bathroom 

3 3 0 William Burn designed Stoke Rochford Hall for M r & Mrs Turnor. Franklin notes that 'the 
juxtaposition of the rooms in his houses works as neatly as the cells in a beehive, both in vertical and 
horizontal relationships'. The Gentleman's Country House (1981): 153. 
3 3 1 Lewis Vulliamy began Westonbirt for M r & Mrs Robert Holford in 1863. 
3 3 2 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7/(1880): 70. 
Such concerns for practicality and convenience could not always be accommodated, however, particularly in 
urban areas or in households of the less affluent middle class where space was more limited in the domestic 
interior. Where space was limited, children continued to be located on the upper-most floors of the house. 



108 

and a convenient nearby strangers' nursery or sick room.3 3 3 Between this suite and the 

family rooms was the school room, adjacent to which was space conveniently allocated to 

the governess.334 For the children of the Walter family, their accommodation, with its 

'Garden entrance and Staircase' was such that, as Kerr noted, 'nothing can be a more 

exquisitely English touch of domestic refinement'.335 And, in this one phrase, manifested in 

his plans for Bear Wood, it might be said that Kerr managed to sum up ideologies of 

patriotism, domesticity and refinement, all of which were integral to the image that 

nineteenth century middle class families wished to convey.336 

Despite the 'guiding function' of the mother, the responsibilities for the daily regime 

for children in a family, such as the Walters, devolved upon 'their own special servants'.337 

Of both the spatial arrangements and the regime, F.M.L. Thompson notes that they were 

intended to bring children up in a highly structured, orderly, and regimented 
routine, partly to make life easy for parents by keeping children out of the 
way except when they were wanted, and partly because this was regarded 
as the best way to train character and prepare children for their eventual 
adult duties and responsibilities.338 

Secluded in their private domain, children were under the daily supervision of servants who 

were also expected to adhere to middle class standards. This meant that, as subordinate 

members of the household, both were required to obey a regime based on middle class 

values such as morality, obedience and duty. As Annemarie Adams notes, separated from 

the mainstream of household life and from adult spaces in the home, 'children who had once 

Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 146. There were indications in the exterior architecture at Bear 
Wood that the south front represented the private, domestic area of occupation. See Part III (1.3). 
3 3 4 This traditional placement of the governess, neither in the main house, nor in the servants' wing, served 
to underscore both her financial dependency and her marginalized position in the domestic hierarchy. 
3 3 5 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 146. 
3 3 6 Ibid: 144. 
3 3 7 Thompson, The Rise of Respectable Society (1988): 125. 
3 3 8 Ibid.: 126. 



109 

mingled freely with adults in the public life-style of the Middle Ages' were, largely because 

of the concept of middle class ethos, not only 'precluded [from] mixing outside one's own 

[class]' but, under the jurisdiction of a 'strict moral code by which many parents sought to 

raise their children [meant that it] prohibited the free intercourse that children had hitherto 

enjoyed'.339 

The wealth of a middle class family such as the Walters at Bear Wood, allowed for 

the perception of how children should be accommodated in the domestic interior to be 

implemented to its fullest extent. This meant that the most extensive, compartmentalized, 

self-enclosed space, entirely separate from the daily activities of the household, could be 

allocated for the children. However, the fact that such space, however extensive, was a 

requirement in the spatial planning of the domestic interior can also be seen as an indication 

of the diversity with which the middle class, whatever its status, represented itself. On the 

one hand, it would appear that the location of the children in close proximity to the mother 

inferred that she reflected nineteenth century middle class ideals based on her 'guiding 

function' and on an apparent intimacy between her and her children. As Adams suggests, 

she might 'set an example'.340 In such an idealized role, as 'Domina, or House-Lady', 

Ruskin saw her as the epitome of true womanhood, at the 'centre of order' in the 

household.341 On the other hand, distanced from the quotidian life of the household and 

raised, primarily, by servants, the children were, as F.M.L. Thompson notes: 

subordinate to their parents, around whose convenience and pleasure 
the whole household revolved; they obeyed parental proxies, even 
though they were superior to the lower servants; they learnt almost 

3 3 9 Adams in Architecture in the Family Way quotes historian, Susan Lasdun, Victorians at Home (1981): 
138. 

3 4 0 Adams, Architecture in the Family Way (1996): 139. 
3 4 1 Ruskin, Sesame and Lilies (1887): 165. 



110 

from the cradle that their place was to be seen and not heard...342 

this is supported by Adams, who writes of the seclusion of children from adult space, 

indicating that they were not subjected to any consistent, pervasive influence of the mother. 

This is illustrated, for example, in contemporary nineteenth century pictorial images of 

parental involvement with children. In family domestic scenes, a servant was usually 

depicted in the background inferring, as Adams suggests, that the 'children's occupation of 

adult space requires the servant's supervision'.343 Although the degree of the seclusion of 

the children from the mainstream of the household varied according to the financial 

resources of the family and the concomitant space for their exclusive use, their separation 

meant they were supervised to a large extent by servants, rather than entirely by the mother. 

As Adams notes, the latter arrangement would have 'too closely resembled working-class 

living conditions'.344 Added to this, the degree by which children could be separated from 

the adult spaces of the house was a distinct mark of class status in that it indicated that the 

family could afford the space in which to accommodate them apart from the general 

household. As Kerr noted, 'in houses where superior servants are to be calculated upon, 

the care of the mother has only in a small degree to be provided for'.3 4 5 

Hence, even though largely raised by servants, children, particularly in a wealthier 

nineteenth century middle class household were accommodated in space especially allocated 

to them in proximity to that occupied by the mother. It was a system that was intended to 

not only reflect status, but also reflect middle class values that mother and children 

3 4 2 Thompson, The Rise of Respectable Society (1988): 127. 
3 4 3 Adams, Architecture in the Family Way (1996): 138. 
For example, "Many Happy Returns" painted by W.P. Frith (1819-1909) portrays such a scene. Children 
who spent too much time with adults were known, somewhat derisively, as parlour-children. 
3 4 4 Adams, Architecture in the Family Way (1996): 139. 
3 4 5 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 144. 



I l l 

represented the idealized family unit, perceived to be an integral component of domestic 

felicity. 



112 

P A R T I V 
T H E D O M E S T I C I N T E R I O R 

(4.7) On the issue of efficient and productive work ethics 

The spatial organization of the domestic interior, particularly with the provision of 

compartmentalized, task-specific, or even gender-specific space for working areas, was a 

means by which nineteenth century middle class requirements of an efficient and productive 

work ethic could be implemented and maintained. In the fields of commerce and 

manufacturing, as well as in the domestic" realm, efficiency, with its resultant productivity, 

were mandates that conformed to the Evangelical doctrine of the morally redeeming power 

of hard work, the salutatory benefits of which, both moral and material, lay at the very heart 

of Victorian middle class dogma. 

The effects of industrialization had contributed to expectations, particularly with the 

capitalist ambitions of an entrepreneurial middle class, that an efficiency of operation should 

result in increased productivity. Such expectations had been grounded, for example, in the 

field of manufacturing, where architectural form and spatial organization had 

accommodated more advanced technology that, in turn, increased efficiency. It was a 

precedent that had been at the turn of the previous century, for instance, with the 

construction of factory spaces, such as at Shrewsbury M i l l . 3 4 6 Here, architectural form had 

specifically accommodated the longer drive shafts of technically advanced machinery which, 

3 4 6 Shrewsbury M i l l built 1796/7 was the first factory to incorporate cast iron columns, beams and window 
frames. It was also the first in which an optimal shape and building materials were tested to withstand the 
weight of steam-driven machines, so allowing for an increase in production. 



113 

in turn, allowed for a more efficient and convenient placement of the machines and, hence, 

for increased production.347 

As the nineteenth century progressed and the middle class became more influential in 

the social order, such objectives were transposed into the spatial organization of the 

domestic sphere. Particularly in the homes of the entrepreneurial middle class, similar 

capitalist expectations of productivity, based on efficiency and convenience were demanded 

from those employed in the household. In a house like Bear Wood, in which evidence of 

many middle class tenets can be identified, it is apparent that the architectural form was 

designed to accommodate the components by which such demands could be implemented. 

The floor plan not only indicates this, but it also makes it clear that the spatial organization 

placed such demands on the servants, rather than on the family household. Kerr advocated 

a clear demarcation between space allocated to family and servants. For the former, his 

concerns were for comfort, rather than for efficiency, so that the aspect, salubrity and the 

prospect of space designated for their use should, as Kerr put it, contribute to the 

'pleasantness of the apartment'.348 At Bear Wood, the south-facing apartments overlooked 

the prospect of terrace, lake and estate, those at the west the formal gardens and croquet 

lawn, the north, the main driveway approach. 

For the domestic offices in which the servants operated, there was no such concern 

for comfort, pleasantness or salubrity, only that neither aspect nor prospect should deter 

from the efficiency of their work. The preferable aspect of a kitchen, for example, should 

face what Kerr noted as the 'Northward cold', to provide good light and so that the interior 

3 4 7 Technology, such as the introduction of cast iron components and cement, had allowed for this more 
advanced form of architecture. 
3 4 8 Kerr, TAe Gentleman's House (1865): 79. 



114 

temperature would not be further increased by sunshine.349 At Bear Wood, the kitchen 

offices faced east, an equally appropriate aspect for, according to Kerr, it was 'exposed to 

the well-known bitterness of the East wind', an alternative that would have provided the 

requisite cooler temperatures and so, presumably, have contributed to more productivity on 

the part of the servants. Kerr also ensured that the prospect of the domestic offices at Bear 

Wood would not inhibit efficiency, for the rooms in which the servants worked overlooked 

either the confinements of the Kitchen court, or the laundry and stables. 

An efficiency of operation was assisted by the convenience gained by the close 

proximity of space to which similar functions were prescribed, a system that reflected 

commercial manufacturing practices. 'Convenience', noted Kerr, 'refers to the active...the 

component parts' that 'shall enable all the uses and purposes of the establishment to be 

carried out in perfect harmony'.350 At Bear Wood where, in an affirmation of planning 

aimed at efficiency, practicality and convenience, the fuel closet was close to the kitchen, 

the cleaning and brushing rooms centred on the footman's room. The butler's room was 

adjacent to the plate safe, the servery and the dining room and also overlooked the 

approach to the carriage porch and the luggage entrance. Next to the luggage entrance was 

the housekeeper's room, conveniently overlooking the access to both the housekeeper's 

corridor and the kitchen court. Past the still room and the women's work room, the 

corridor lead to the kitchen entrance corridor, along which were related offices. There was 

a housemaids' closet on every floor of Bear Wood, a practice condoned by Stevenson as a 

'great convenience...in every house with any pretension to good planning'.351 It would 

Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7 / ( 1 8 8 0 ) : 9 7 . 



1 1 5 

appeax that the attention paid to the 'good planning' of the spatial organization of the 

domestic interior confirms that convenience was considered a major factor for an efficiency 

of operation, a concern that nineteenth century architects, including Kerr, upheld.352 This 

concern was also apparent to the reviewer of The Gentleman's House, in that Kerr's 

maxims for the design of the domestic interior were endorsed with the statement that 

'certainly those sacrificing convenience cannot belong to good architecture'.353 

However efficient or convenient the spatial organization of the domestic interior of a 

house such as Bear Wood was, productive results also depended on those who operated 

within that space. Middle class ethos stressed the morally redeeming benefits of hard work, 

achieved as much by the work ethics of the individual as by the efficiency or convenience of 

architectural planning. Under the rubric of the Evangelical doctrine reflected in the values 

to which the middle class subscribed, the efficacy of 'industry and work' was, as Richard 

Altick notes, 'the moral imperative...identified with that of faith and elevated into a virtual 

eleventh commandment by Carlyle: "For there is a perennial nobleness, and even 

sacredness, in Work...'"3 5 4 Such a moral onus placed on the servants of a middle class 

domestic household, had, necessarily, to be maintained. Servants were meant to be inspired 

by adages such as "Waste Not, Want Not" often prominently displayed in kitchens. The 

onus for self-discipline and management was supported by regulations to which servants 

were expected to adhere, an expectation often enforced by rules that required, for instance, 

that 'breakages not mentioned within the day must be made good'.3 5 5 As with the tenants 

A study of floor plans for contemporaneous country houses illustrated in Franklin, The Gentleman's 
Country House (1981) confirms this. 
353 The Builder, "The Gentleman's House", January 7, 1865:3. 
3 5 4 Altick, Victorian People and Ideas (1973): 168 & 169. 
3 5 5 Briggs, Victorian Things (1988): 258. 



116 

in the estate village attached to a country house, non-compliance to proscribed standards by 

the domestic servants could mean termination of employment, an act confirmed by the 

nineteenth century Reverend Baldwin Brown who remarked upon the 'dependence of the 

class that supplies our servants'.356 

Kerr, in addition to his 'convenient distribution' of space and its organization, gave 

considerable and detailed advice on the contents of these work-designated spaces to further 

lend to efficient and productive habits.357 The Gentleman's House provided instruction on 

both dimensions and placement of equipment for, in the interests of convenience, efficiency 

and practicality, there was, as Kerr insisted, a 'place for everything'.358 His was an 

objective to not only accommodate efficiency, but that would also subscribe to a further 

characteristic by which the middle class identified themselves, that of an awareness of 

progress being made in the fields of technology and science. 

This was a tradition that had been in effect over the centuries. In 1610, Robert Bainbridge issued Some 
Rules and Orders for the Government of the House of an Earle. The Footman's Directory of 1825 was also 
a list of rules to be followed. Both quoted in Girouard, A Country House Companion (1987): 129 & 135. In 
country houses such as 18th century Erdigg or Woburn Abbey, rules directed at servants were painted on 
boards, where they remain in situ. 
3 5 6 Briggs, Victorian Things (1988): 259. 
3 5 7 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 200. : 
3 5 8 Ibid: 71. 



117 

P A R T IV 
T H E D O M E S T I C I N T E R I O R 

(4.8) Issues of technology and scientific progress 

It would appear from the copious and detailed advice offered in The Gentleman's 

House that Kerr considered himself to be a man of the modern nineteenth century, Who 

recognized the advantages offered by advances made in both science and technology. Much 

of Kerr's theoretical advice can be seen to have been put into practice at Bear Wood, 

perhaps to asseverate perceptions, not only of status and prestige, but also of the grasp that 

owner and architect had of progressive modernity. Kerr designed Bear Wood for a man 

who was technically-minded, indeed, 'destined...to effect organic and far-reaching 

improvements in the mechanical production of 'The Times".3 5 9 According to Girouard, 

Walter had been 'personally responsible for giving The Times the most up-to-date printing 

works in the world' 3 6 0 Walter's interest in the field was evident when, in 1886, on a voyage 

to America, he 'spent most of his time in the engine room'.3 6 1 

Kerr's mandate that the operation of a gentleman's house be 'that of a great well-

oiled machine running on so many cogs, of which the highest possible praise was to say "it 

ran like clockwork'" was diligently attended to by the incorporation of much of the very 

latest technology into Bear Wood. As Julian Orbach affirms, Bear Wood was 'built to the 

most advanced technological standards of the day'.3 6 2 Requirements for efficiency and 

productivity in the domestic realm reflected contemporary commercial manufacturing 

3 5 9 Dictionary of National Biography, "Walter, John (1818-1894): 715. 
3 6 0 Girouard, The Victorian Country House (1979): 122. 
3 6 1 Ibid. 
3 6 2 Orbach, Victorian Architecture in Britain (1987): 52. 



118 

practices that depended on technological progress. In the commercial sphere, a focus on 

maximum production, aided by the combination of time management and efficient 

machinery, had underwritten the fortunes accumulated by many middle class entrepreneurs. 

In keeping, John Walter oversaw the installation of mechanically-improved printing presses 

that increased output for less cost and so subscribed to a mandate for maximum efficiency 

and production, not only in business, but also in his domestic realm.363 

Nineteenth century concerns for efficiency and practicality were also aided by 

scientific progress. That the middle class saw themselves as purveyors of such progress is 

suggested by Kerr who likened the 'character' of the kitchen to that of 'a complicated 

laboratory'.364 With the integration of advances made by both technology and science into 

their lifestyles, it might be argued that middle class owners and architects perceived 

themselves as representing the vigour and progressiveness by which their class wished to be 

identified. At the same time, however, their application of scientific and technological 

advances to the domestic interior provided a means by which middle class ideals of 

efficiency, convenience and comfort could be accommodated. An overview of 

contemporary issues of the Building News supports this.365 Each issue was prefaced by 

several pages of advertisements for the latest in building supplies and materials that featured 

an extensively diverse range of items covering the complete spectrum of domestic 

3 6 3 Girouard cites other 19th. century middle class owners of country houses who were also 'technically 
minded', such as Wright at Ormaston, Thorneycroft at Tettenhall and Armstrong at Cragside. The 
Victorian Country House (1979): 18. 

3 6 4 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 44. 
3 6 5 Issues surveyed covered 1874 - 1875. The latest in building materials, for instance, offered Dennetts 
Fire-Proof Construction or Creeke's Patent Capped Drain Pipes. 



119 

requirements, from materials suitable for both roof and drainage, to the most up-to-date 

cooking appliances and plumbing accessories.366 

As has been noted, the most modern materials were used in the construction of Bear 

Wood. In addition, it is apparent that many of the latest advances in scientific progress and 

technology were incorporated into Kerr's design for the interior. The floor plan indicates 

'Heating' at the base of the principal staircase, where a circular, cast iron radiator for 

central heating was installed.367 Heated with hot water from a boiler in the kitchen court, 

next to which was the engine house for pumping water from the adjacent water tower, 

radiators such as this ensured that the comfort of central heating supplemented heat emitted 

from fireplaces.368 Also included in the floor plan were bathrooms and WCs, indicating that 

plumbing for water, drainage and sewage was installed on each floor. A gasworks, built by 

the lake, provided the house with gas lighting.369 A life, located near the back stairs, rather 

than in the main house, so presumably intended for the convenience of hauling luggage, 

Other publications supported this. For example, Charles Eastlake published Hints on Household Taste 
in 1878. In 1880, J.J. Stevenson published House Architecture, Vols. I & II. With a concern for hygiene, 
both paid considerable attention to drainage, heating and ventilation, as well as to the use of easily cleaned 
modern materials, such as encaustic tiles. At Brodsworth Hall, the latest invention of a linoleum 
manufactured under the name of 'Silentium' made to imitate parquet flooring, was laid in the billiard room. 
Source: English Heritage, Brodsworth Hall (1995): 19. 
3 6 7 This huge, circular cast iron radiator remains in situ at the base of the principal staircase. 
3 6 8 A 'ponderous' heating apparatus was installed at the cost of over S3,000.00. Girouard, The Victorian 
Country House (1979): 122. 
The incorporation of the latest in scientific progress into country houses continued. Less than a decade later 
at Wykehurst, E.M.Barry used a cavity wall construction, double-framed fireproof floors of iron and 
concrete, as well as warm air heating and internal water pipes that supplied water to all floors. The pipes 
were protected from freezing by running through hot air flues. Source: Mitchell, Victorian Britain (1988): 
36. 
3 6 9 Although Kerf does not address them in The Gentleman's House, Stevenson in House Architecture, 
Vol. II (1880) discusses concerns for heat, ventilation and the contamination of the atmosphere emitted from 
gas lighting in Chapter X H : "Artificial Lighting": 254-256. The architect, S.S. Teuton (1812-1873) had 
pioneered the use of gas for domestic lighting at Tortworth, built between 1849 & 1852. In 1878, Cragside, 
owned by Sir William Armstrong, steel and shipping magnate, became the first domestic building in the 
world in which electric lights, powered by the estate's water-driven generator, were installed. Armstrong's 
interest in technology was also evident in the grounds of Cragside, where could be found 'examples of 
hydraulics and engineering'. The National Trust, Cragside, Northumberland (1992): 5. 



120 

connected the main with the top floor. In 1887, a decade or so after the completion of 

the house, a private telephone wire was installed at Bear Wood, indicating an ongoing 

interest on the part of the owner that the latest technological and scientific advances be 

incorporated into the house.371 

The integration of technology and scientific progress into nineteenth century country 

houses was of concern primarily to the middle class, an inclination that set them apart from 

other classes. Whilst it is obvious that the less affluent members of the middle class and the 

working classes did not have the financial resources with which to incorporate the latest in 

technology into their houses, it would appear that, with some exceptions, such as Eaton 

Hall, where indoor plumbing was installed during remodelling in the 1870s, or Hatfield, 

where electric light was installed in 1881, few aristocratic country houses boasted 

technically-advanced appliances.372 Perhaps it was that, for the aristocracy, traditional ways 

by which their domestic interiors had operated died hard, traditions that could, in the mid-

nineteenth century, still be supported by an unlimited supply of cheap domestic labour. Or, 

perhaps it was, as Girouard suggests, that middle class requirements for domestic comfort 

and convenience, for efficiency and practicality were generally considered by the aristocracy 

to be the province of the 'nouveau-riche, as unhealthy, or, even worse, American'.373 

Issues of domestic comfort, convenience, efficiency and practicality were addressed in detail 

Until William Armstrong of Cragside pioneered hydraulic power for domestic use in the 1870s, it is 
likely that the Lift at Bear Wood was originally operated manually. 
3 7 1 Receipts for the annual rental of the private telephone wire from March 15, 1887 to March 14, 1888 
show a sum of S44.15.00. Ref: DE WL F13 RO. 
3 7 2 Girouard in The Victorian Country House (1979) lists 11 country houses that, to his knowledge, had 
electric light by the 1880s. Of these, only Hatfield (in 1881) Eaton (in 1887) belonged to aristocrats, the 
remaining 9 having belonged to middle class owners. 
3 7 3 Ibid: 18. Hare, The Story oj'My Life (2nd. series) (1890). 
Both John Walter and Robert Kerr travelled to America. Kerr spent part of his youth i n America where, 
according to Hitchcock, 'as well known to Victorians, radicalism was contagious in all fields of thought'. 
Early Victorian Architecture in Britain (1954): 606. 



121 

in the works of both Kerr and Stevenson, primarily, it is suggested, to accommodate middle 

class requirements in the domestic sphere. Such requirements were to be perceived in the 

nineteenth century as luxuries associated with the middle class for, as Girouard notes, 'in his 

interminable country house peregrinations' Augustus Hare 'used the word 'luxurious' 

almost exclusively for the houses of the new rich'. 3 7 4 

Evidence of the practical application of mechanical science and technology 

incorporated into a country house like Bear Wood is a means by which its owner can be 

identified as a man of practicality, in step with the progresses of the age, who represented 

many of the values by which the middle class wished to be identified. Even if was only the 

more affluent members of the middle class who were able to be more amenable to 

incorporate the very latest technological and scientific developments into their homes, it 

distinguished them with an identity that inferred an active subscription to the progress of 

modern society. It was an identity that set them, as representatives of the middle class, 

apart from either the aristocratic or the working classes. 

Girouard, The Victorian Country House (1979): 19. Augustus Hare, The Story of My Life (2nd. series) 
(1890). 



122 

PART IV 
T H E DOMESTIC INTERIOR 

(4.9) Issues of health, sanitation and hygiene 

In addition to the employment of advanced technology and materials, attention was 

given during the construction of country houses, like Bear Wood, to other principles on 

which nineteenth century middle class tenets were founded. Such principles focused on the 

importance of maintaining standards of health and hygiene, considered by the middle class 

values to be analogous to moral rectitude. As Robin Evans notes, there developed 'an 

intimate bond between physical and moral degradation', which meant that it became an 

imperative that issues of sanitation, health and hygiene be addressed.375 

Concerns for the provision of sanitary facilities in the interests of health and hygiene 

were apparent throughout the social order. As a result, during the century considerable 

attention was paid to systems of sanitation whereby concerns focused on the efficiency and 

the location of the arrangements for drainage, water supplies and cesspools, as well as for 

ventilation and heating.376 Largely underwritten by middle class values, concerns for 

sanitary arrangements were addressed in the public arena. In state-run institutions such as 

hospitals, prisons and asylums, used, primarily, by the lower classes, prevalent middle class 

values that set standards for health and hygiene meant attention to ventilation and heating, 

as well as access to uncontaminated water and adequate sewerage systems.377 

3 7 5 Evans, Translations from Drawing to Architecture (1997): 95. 
3 7 6 Also consistently advertised were Doulton's Closet Pans & Traps awarded "5 medals for progress and 
merit". 
3 7 7 In 1861, the death of the Prince Consort from typhoid fever, presumed to have been contracted from the 
faulty drains at Windsor Casde, had acerbated public concerns for sanitary arrangements, as did recurrent 
contagious epidemics. 



123 

Similar standards for sanitation extended into middle class homes, although such 

pragmatic concerns were not new or specific to the nineteenth century middle class. The 

provision of water for domestic use had always been a concern, with the consequent careful 

siting of houses historically near a supply of water and on raised ground to allow for 

drainage flow. Mechanical means of pumping water, such as water wheels driven by water 

or animal power, were in evidence in the seventeenth century, a system later superceded by 

the invention of steam-powered engines.378 However, although some country houses, such 

as Blenheim, Woburn or Carlshalton boasted bath houses or plunge baths in the eighteenth 

century, a concern for hygiene or sanitation was not extensive, even among the wealthy.379 

In Girouard's opinion, this was because 'personal cleanliness did not rank high enough', so 

that the consequent 'lack of progress in sanitation was due to a combination of cheap 

labour, lack of demand and technical disadvantages'.380. 

Prevalent middle class standards of health and hygiene were acknowledged by 

nineteenth century architects and applied to the domestic interior. At Bear Wood, Kerr 

demonstrated his subscription to such values, not only to the latest advances in technology, 

but also to demands that middle class standards for sanitary arrangements be 

accommodated. He installed a total of twenty two water closets at Bear Wood, so 

following the maxim he addressed in the 'The Supplementaries' section of The Gentleman's 

House. Of 'primary consideration', he wrote about water closets, was to be a 'sufficient 

3 7 8 At Uppark, the first effective domestic water pump had been installed in 1650. At Greys Court, a 
donkey wheel was used to raise water from the well. (It remains the only complete one in existence and was 
in use until electricity was brought onto the estate in the 1920s.) 
James Watt perfected the steam engine c. 1764. 
3 7 9 Carshalton House (1719-1720) was built for Sir John Fellowes, a director of the South Sea Company. 
3 8 0 Girouard, Life in the English Country House (1978): 256. 



1 2 4 

number' and 'properly distributed'.381 However, this was advice that was later tempered by 

Stevenson, who remarked that the 'tendency of modern planning has been to increase their 

number, scattering them all over the house instead of placing a less number in convenient 

situations'.382 Miasmic concerns were also an issue to Stevenson in that the 'tendency of 

modern planning' to increase the number of water closets could prove to be an 'additional 

source of fever from sewer gas'.383 However, in the general interests of health and hygiene, 

as well as in the interests of modesty and moral rectitude, both Kerr and Stevenson 

concurred that water closets be in 'private situations', together with a ready and abundant 

supply of water and an efficient means of drainage.384 

It would appear that the provision of bathrooms in the houses of the more affluent 

was not only to appease middle class standards for health and hygiene, but that they were 

also regarded as a status symbol.385 At Bear Wood, five bathrooms were installed which, 

despite its large size, was, according to Girouard, 'a very generous supply for a Victorian 

house'.386 Such a number reflected Kerr's directive that 'no house of any pretensions will 

be devoid of a general Bathroom; and in a large house there must be several of these'.387 

The floor plan for Bear Wood indicates that the bathrooms were allocated to family and 

guests, with none specified for the servants, indicating that Kerr's directive that 'in an 

establishment of importance, a Servants' Bath-room also ought to be provided in their 

3 8 1 Kerr, The Gentleman's Country House (1865): 152. 
3 8 2 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7/(1880): 74. 
3 8 3 Ibid. 
3 8 4 As early as 1778, Joseph Bramah had patented efficient WCs with valves. 
The December 14, 1874 edition of The Building News carried correspondence dealing with the issue of 
'sewer gases and a scientific and safe water-closet': 682. 
3 8 5 Bathrooms in this context refers to rooms for bathing, not WCs. 
3 8 6 Girouard, The Victorian Country House (1979): 268 & 269. Stoke Rochford, built by the middle class 
Tumor family had two bathrooms in 1839, whereas, 'as late as 1873, Carlton Towers [owned by the 
aristocratic Beaumonts] had none'. Ibid: 22. 
3 8 7 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 150. 



125 

department' was not followed.388 Despite this, it might be assumed that the application of 

contemporary middle class standards of health and hygiene were intended to extend to 

household servants, an assumption supported by Stevenson, who wrote, T think the 

servants should have the use of a bath', although he cautioned, 'but they will not use it 

unless it has hot water'.389 

In addition to systems for domestic sanitation, Kerr also paid significant theoretical 

attention to other concerns considered important for maintaining middle class standards, 

such as ventilation and heating, for the main part of a house as well as for the servants' area. 

For family and guests, ventilation, along with facilities for heating, were seen in terms of 

their domestic comfort. As Stevenson confirmed, on the arrangements for 'such as heating 

and flues, ventilation...the comfort of a house in a great measure depends'.390 Despite such 

apparent demands for comfort, Stephen Fiske, an American travelling in England in 1869, 

noted attitudes that 'heated air is considerably unhealthy...The English wrap themselves up 

to cross the hall as though they were going out of doors...'391 For servants, however, the 

provision of adequate ventilation and heating was not, Kerr admonished, to be regarded as a 

'matter of luxury'.3 9 2 Rather, in the interests of their efficiency and productivity, it was 

important that the health of servants be sustained by adequate standards of ventilation. 

Concerns for ventilation were based on contemporary theories of the benefits of 

fresh air to counter the spread of disease, concerns reflected in Ruskin's anxieties about the 

3 8 8 Ibid: 151. 
The 5 bathrooms installed at Bear Wood were situated as follows: 1 in the family suite, 1 in the nursery, 1 
in the young ladies' suite and 1 for guests on each of the two bedroom floors. 
3 8 9 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7/(1880): 75. 
3 9 0 Ibid.: 212. 
3 9 1 Fiske, English Photographs (1869): 196-197 quoted in Girouard, The Victorian Country House (1979): 
27. 
3 9 2 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 202. 



126 

world outside the domestic sphere, included in which was the spread of infection.393 In the 

public realm, theories about the benefits of fresh air had been implemented, for example, in 

hospitals where the pavilion style of construction and 'Nightingale' wards were designed to 

allow cross-ventilation. A similarly well-ventilated domestic interior was also important to 

maintain the health of the servants. In the same way that the presence of servants could, as 

the architectural historian, Jill Franklin notes, threaten the 'illusion of family privacy and 

possibly even family purity', so risks of contamination from servants could be a potential 

threat to familial health.394 

In addition, in the interests of efficiency and productivity of servants, Kerr noted in 

the section entitled 'Light and Air and Salubrity' in The Gentleman's House that ventilation 

'ought to be placed at a maximum' in the 'Offices' so that the 'labour of service may be 

performed with advantage'.395 To underscore the importance he attached to the issue of 

ventilation, he addressed it comprehensively when advising on domestic offices, from 

kitchen to cloakrooms, from scullery to servants' bedrooms. That heat was of secondary 

concern and not considered necessary for the comfort of the servants was evidenced by 

Kerr's advocation that although 'every [servant's] room ought to have a fireplace, and good 

light and ventilation', the fireplace was 'for use in case of illness if no more...'396 

Reflecting attention being paid to the benefits of fresh air and, presumably, with little 

regard for heating the interior occupied by servants, he also advised, 'let every room...and 

every passage be...sufficiently ventilated from the external atmosphere'.397 Water closets, 

3 9 3 Adams in Architecture in the Family Way (1996) cites Ruskin's anxieties: 5. 
3 9 4 Franklin, The Gentleman's Country House (1981): 88. Franklin suggests that 'there is no doubt that 
the Victorians were terrified of sexual encounters between gentlemen and pretty housemaids'. 
3 9 5 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (11865): 202. 
3 9 6 Ibid: 250 & 251. 



127 

too, were to be 'thoroughly ventilated and directly lighted from the open air'. 3 y s For 

architects,̂  it was, said Kerr, the 'very best of skilful [sic] design, in the consideration 

whether the Offices are fresh and wholesome'399 

Architectural concerns for what Kerr cited as a 'fresh and wholesome' domestic 

environment extended to include other concerns, such as cooking odours. Presumably 

linked to miasmic concerns that the atmosphere be salubrious, the 'offensive vapours' 

'engendered' by cooking were considered undesirable by middle class standards for health 

and hygiene.400 It was an issue also addressed by Stevenson who noted that 'the thought of 

the architect' could prevent family and guests from being greeted by the 'sickly odour' of 

cooking 'in the halls and passages...[or by] an atmosphere [that] has an accumulated a taint 

of perpetual cooking'.4 0 1 As Kerr had noted, the risk of cooking odours penetrating the 

main part of a house could be minimized by the architect ensuring that provisions be made 

to intercept them. Such provisions included an efficient means of ventilation, preferably a 

system of cross-ventilation, together with adequate distance and turns in the route leading 

from kitchen to dining room. A well-planned ventilation system would, according to Kerr, 

'ultimately carry off, but meanwhile...prevent from spreading or even stagnating' offensive 

odours.402 

At Bear Wood, Kerr was able to deal effectively with distancing the kitchen from 

the dining room by locating it some one hundred and fifty feet from the latter along a 

circuitous main corridor route, from which it was separated by a kitchen entrance corridor 

3 9 8 Ibid: 152. 
3 9 9 Ibid: 202. 
4 0 0 Ibid. 
4 0 1 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 11 (1880): 82 & 83. 
4 0 2 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 202. 



128 

and a kitchen lobby.403 That Kerr could do this can be interpreted as an indication of the 

prestige of the owner in that the financial resources of John Walter meant that the dining 

room could be so far distanced from the kitchen. The ability to do this in a domestic 

interior also served to separate the wealthier representatives of the middle class who 

occupied extensive domestic space from those of the lower orders, for whom the odour of 

cooking could only be justified by architects as being comforting and inviting. Placing the 

kitchen in Bear Wood at a distance from the main part of the house, however, was not ah 

architectural innovation. In previous centuries, kitchen pavilions had also been distanced 

from the main house, as seen at country houses such as Petworth, Uppark or Kedleston4 0 4 

Then, the primary intention had been to minimize the risk of fire from open cooking ranges 

from destroying the entire house but, by the mid-nineteenth century when technically-

advanced houses such as Bear Wood were constructed, cooking was carried out on closed 

ranges, thus reducing the risk of fire.405 

As has been stated, the attention and concern focused on issues of hygiene and 

health in the nineteenth century sprang from middle class values that subscribed to notions 

of propriety and common decency, wherein good standards of hygiene were considered 

4 0 3 Franklin notes that, at Mentmore, 'even by Victorian standards the dinner service route was 
incomprehensibly torturous'. The Gentleman's Country House (1981): 138. 
The elimination of cooking smells appeared to take precedence over the serving of hot food, although 
Stevenson addressed the issue in House Architecture, Vol. 11 (1880) when he suggested that, in the service-
room adjacent to the dining room, 'it is convenient ...to fix a hot-closet, heated by the general hot-water 
circulation of the house or by gas, for keeping the dishes which arrive from the kitchen hot till they are 
wanted...': 97. 
4 0 4 At both Petworth (c. 1680) and Uppark (c. 1750) the kitchen facilities were housed in separate 
buildings, connected to the house by underground tunnels that not only provided protection from the 
elements, but kept servants from view. At Kedleston, the kitchen was located in the west wing pavilion, 
connected to the main house by an enclosed semi-circular colonnade. 
4 0 5 Manufactures such as H . Walker & Son made the 'Eagle' range, Dinning & Cooke made roasting and 
oven ranges. By 1872, steam-powered cooking apparatus was in use. Source: The National Trust, 
Petworth, the Servants' Quarters (1997): 9. 



129 

analogous to moral decency. The nineteenth century perception that good standards of 

health and hygiene went hand-in-hand with middle class notions of domestic, familial felicity 

and moral propriety is inferred by the frequent use of such inspirational adages as ' A 

Healthy Home is a Happy Home', or 'Cleanliness is next to Godliness'. 

Muthesius was to take the analogy of middle class standards of health and hygiene 

as representing a responsible and harmonious social order one step further. In considering 

the value of a 'modern English house' as a model, he equated nineteenth century middle 

class concerns with cleanliness, bathing and bodily hygiene with cultural progress, an 

equation that, it might be argued, reflected contemporary middle class perceptions of how 

they wished to be identified.406 However, despite this investiture of cultural progress on the 

middle class, despite the evidence that its values pervaded the social order, there was 

recognition that the means by which health and hygiene could be maintained in the domestic 

interior were a prerogative of the affluent. This, too, was to set the middle class apart from 

the working class for, as Stevenson noted with some perception, 'fresh air and cleanliness 

are the luxuries of the well fed and well clothed'.407 

4 0 6 Muthesius, The English House (1979): 95. First published as Das Englishe Haus in 1904/5, it was the 
result of the time Muthesius had spent in England between 1860 and 1900. 
4 0 7 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7/(1880): 3. 



130 

PART TV 
T H E DOMESTIC INTERIOR 

(4.10) The issue of displaying cultural artefacts 

The display of cultural acquisitions in a domestic setting has always been a means by 

which attributes such as erudite acuity, elite taste, wealth and status could be aesthetically 

affirmed. By the sixteenth century, the domestic space in which cultural artefacts were 

exhibited was generally in the form of a long gallery, an enclosed apartment in which 

exercise could be taken.408 A display of portraits was intended to impress the viewer with 

the status of the family, as well as with images of those of influence connected, in some 

way, to the owner.409 By the eighteenth century, the long gallery often formed part of an 

entire enfilade of public rooms in which a collection of cultural artefacts could be 

viewed.410 With this enfilade of rooms replaced, in nineteenth century country houses, by a 

matrix of enclosed spaces, there appeared to be no requirement that the public spaces of the 

domestic interior serve as repositories in which to specifically display artworks. 

This observation might be warranted by a survey of the floor plans for nineteenth 

century country houses in Frankhn's The Gentleman's Country House.411 These floor plans 

reveal that, with the exception of Bear Wood, there was no specific allocation of space in 

which to display works of art.412 In spite of this, it cannot be assumed that the affluent 

4 0 8 For example, a long gallery was in place in Longleat by 1572, in Hardwick Hall by 1590 & that at 
Penshurst Place was finished in 1607. 
4 0 9 This might be considered an antecedent to the signed photographs that were to be similarly displayed in 
the domestic sphere, particularly in a country house setting. 
4 1 0 This was true at Syon, for example, where in 1762 Robert Adam remodelled the Jacobean long gallery 
to be part of the enfilade of rooms that encircled all four sides of the house. 
4 1 1 Franklin illustrates 10 floor plans, including Bear Wood, for country houses built between 1835 and 
1870. 

4 1 2 The exception of Bear Wood will be addressed later in the section. 



131 

middle class owners of these houses did not purchase or possess artefacts. In fact, both 

Kerr and Stevenson offered advice on how and where art should be displayed in the 

domestic interior. Kerr appeared to attach some significance to both ownership and the 

intrinsic worth of art when he noted that '...a valuable collection of pictures ought to be 

properly displayed, - not merely put up on the walls of the Family-room at hazard'.413 

Stevenson acknowledged that 'special galleries for pictures and sculptures' were sometimes 

necessary but, in line with nineteenth century middle class requirements for private, 

domestic space, he advised that it be 'better in most cases to use works of art for adorning 

rooms we live in' 4 1 4 

Despite such acknowledgments, it would appear that any provision for the display of 

cultural artefacts in the domestic interior of nineteenth century country houses was not an 

architectural priority. This was in contrast to the spatial organization of country houses 

built in previous centuries, where the architectural form for the interior had accommodated 

the exhibition of collections of art works so that they could be viewed by a visiting public. 

By the mid-nineteenth century, a shift in such architectural priorities was evident. For 

example, in The Gentleman's House, a definitive treatise offering a plethora of architectural 

advice, with a minutiae of detailed and comprehensive suggestions, Kerr gave only cursory 

attention to architectural considerations for the display of cultural artefacts. Compared to 

the spatial organization of other areas of the domestic interior for which Kerr's discourse 

offered specific advice that extended to diagrammatic suggestions, even to the dimensions 

and placement of furniture and equipment, his information on what he referred to as 

'Galleries of Art' was markedly sparse. Although he did address the practical issues of 

Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 451. 
Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7/(1880): 65. 



132 

lighting, size, and door placement, he indicated that the major consideration in planning 

such apartments was not for the aesthetic display of works of art. Rather, with concern for 

contemporary middle class requirements for domestic felicity, he cautioned that the spatial 

organization be such that 'family comfort not be sacrificed'.415 

Kerr's concern exactly dovetailed with contemporary requirements that both the 

architectural expression and the spatial organization of a middle class home accommodate 

one of the most pervasive elements of middle class requirements, that of the insular, family 

sphere. The concomitant compartmentalization and the division of the domestic interior to 

provide this private space took precedence over any concerns for the display of cultural 

artefacts. Instead, as noted by Stevenson, it was expected that works of art be incorporated 

into the domestic space as a contribution to family comfort or enjoyment, rather than in the 

specifically designed space found in earlier country houses where they could be viewed in a 

public manner. 

That domestic concerns not be sacrificed for the sake of exhibiting cultural artefacts 

was evident at Brodsworth, for example. Despite purchasing a large collection of sculpture 

at the Dublin International Exhibition of 1865, the owner, Charles Thellusson evidently 

demanded no specific space for the display of either these, or his collection of English and 

Dutch paintings. Instead, the artworks were dispersed 'as one of the dominating decorative 

elements' throughout the halls, corridors and rooms of the interior.416 This would infer 

that, rather than be exhibited as an impressive indication of the aesthetic taste of the owner, 

they were intended to add to the comfort and salubrity of domestic life. 

4 1 5 Ibid. 
4 1 6 English Heritage, Brodsworth Hall (1995): 13. 



133 

At Bear Wood, records indicate that some works of art were displayed in the 

drawing and diriing rooms, presumably to also contribute to the domestic enjoyment of 

family and guests.417 However, unlike other contemporaneous country houses surveyed, 

the floor plan for Bear Wood indicates space specifically designated as a picture gallery 4 1 8 

Records show that the most valuable accumulation of artworks owned by John Walter were 

housed in this space.419 That the incorporation of this gallery at Bear Wood should have 

been an exceptional demand for the interior of a middle class house was confirmed by Kerr. 

He made special note that one of the 'peculiarities of design' for a 'Mansion' in 'Berkshire', 

was because 'the primary basis of the arrangement consists in the demand for a Picture-

Gallery'.4 2 0 Iri line with contemporary middle class requirements that the focus of the 

spatial organization of the domestic interior be on accommodating the family rather than on 

a display of cultural artefacts, Kerr cautioned his reader that 'to attach such a Gallery to the 

house as a mere show-place is an idea wanting in that domesticity of motive which ought to 

pervade everything connected with a private dwelling'.421 

From this apparent dichotomy between the presence of the picture gallery at Bear 

Wood and Kerr's concerns that it be a negatively pervasive influence on the domestic 

interior, it can be speculated that the space was incorporated as a particular requirement of 

4 1 7 A catalogue of the pictures at Bear Wood was compiled for the purposes of insurance in 1884. See 
Appendix A. Girouard includes a late Victorian view of the drawing room at Bear Wood in The Victorian 
Country House (1971): plate 248. The image shows a picture hung over the fireplace, curio cabinets and 
shelves, displays of porcelain, a portfolio rack and books in the room. (Also, in what might be considered a 
middle class concern for cultural refinement juxtaposed to requirements for domestic comfort, the room 
included chairs that ranged from Sheraton-style, to contemporary-style upholstered armchairs, to wicker-
work armchairs, to bent-wood occasional chairs. Tables included an eclectic mix of traditional, 
contemporary and Indian styles.) 
4 1 8 See Franklin, The Gentleman's Country House (1981). 
4 1 9 See Appendix A. The assumption that the bulk of the collection was housed in the gallery is based on 
its assessed value compared to the value of those in the drawing and dining rooms. 
4 2 0 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 451. 



134 

the owner. It would appear that Walter intended it primarily for the display Dutch paintings 

he had inherited from his father. That this should be considered exceptional was inferred by 

The Times, which made particular reference to Walter's 'own gallery' in which was 

displayed 'partly collected by his father...an assemblage of masterpieces'.422 To further 

indicate that this was a somewhat unusual means by which to display an art collection in a 

contemporary middle class domestic interior, The Times evidently felt it necessary to add 

that Walter 'thoroughly enjoyed discussing its beauties with visitors who had studied the 

Dutch school'.4 2 3 

Like John Walter at Bear Wood, Joseph Neeld, M.P., middle class owner of 

Grittleton House, was an exception in that he had the interior designed to accommodate his 

'large collection of paintings'.424 The result was, as the architectural historian, Henry-

Russell Hitchcock notes, that the interior of Grittleton consisted of: 

enormous rooms and top-lighted vestibules primarily intended as 
galleries for the display of his Old Masters and his contemporary 
English pictures...Both architectural effect and domestic convenience 
were intentionally subordinated to the client's rather special requirements.425 

The galleries in which both Walter and Neeld exhibited their collections can be seen as both 

exceptional within the context of contemporary nineteenth century architectural design for a 

country house, as well as an emulation of predecessor country house owners. As such, the 

galleries at Bear Wood and Grittleton appeared to counter prevalent middle class concerns 

for domesticity. That the exceptional architectural feature of these galleries was 

422 The Times, November 5, 1894, "Death ofMr Walter". 
4 2 3 Ibid. 
Because the Walter family would probably have represented middle class values, it must be presumed that 
these 'visitors' were guests invited by the family, rather than members of the public viewing the house. 
4 2 4 Hitchcock, Early Victorian Architecture in Britain (1954): 256-257. Grittleton House, near 
Cippenham, Wilts, was build c. 1853 by the architect James Thomson, a pupil of J.B. Papworth. 



135 

incorporated into the domestic interior of their houses can be interpreted as an indication of 

the diverse and, seemingly, contradictory ways in which the middle class often appeared to 

represent itself. On the one hand, it would seem that cultural acquisitions dispersed 

throughout the interior of the house were intended to reflect demands for domestic comfort 

and enjoyment. Conversely, that the spatial organization in these two particular houses 

included designated space in which to display collections appears to reference intentions 

from previous centuries that the artworks imply the cultural eruditeness of the owner. 

However, as the country houses belonging to nineteenth century middle class owners were 

not available for public viewing, it can be presumed that the display could have only been 

intended for the private pleasure of the owner, his family and his guests. 

In contrast to this is the argument presented in this paper that, in the process of 

estabhshing an identity, the nineteenth century middle class often appeared to stridently and 

ostentatiously advertise its entrepreneurial achievements. Notions of privacy represented 

the domestic interior as a medium in which to incorporate cultural artefacts in a manner that 

satisfied such middle class requirements as rectitude and propriety. This meant that the 

confines of the domestic domain precluded it from being a means by which attributes, such 

as entrepreneurial success or cultural acuity, could be proclaimed in a public manner. 

However, despite admonitions from such as Kerr that there be 'elegance and importance 

without ostentation', there is evidence that the middle class did feel it necessary to display 

both their cultural acquisitions and their wealth in the public, rather than in the domestic 

forum. Such evidence is suggested, for example, by the fact that, until the onset of the 

economic depression in the 1880s, there was an unprecedented number of exhibitions of 



136 

artworks, where the contents were either primarily purchased or loaned by middle class 

collectors.426 

In Art and the Victorian Middle Class, art historian, Dianne Macleod presents 

numerous case studies of affluent members of the middle class who made considerable 

investments in the acquisition of artworks.427 John Walter of Bear Wood was in the ranks 

of such investors. At the time of his death, it was noted that he had been a 'judicious buyer, 

and a regular visitor to the exhibitions and principal sales' and had accumulated a collection 

of both inherited and purchased works of noted value.428 In this, he reflected the prosperity 

of the nation and an increasingly wealthy middle class for, as The Times noted, 'commerce 

and industry [were] the true sources of the greatness of England'.429 In modern, nineteenth 

century England, economic progress had, in part, been identified by both the availability and 

the consumption of material goods. As Macleod points out, the Victorian economist, 

Michael Mulhall considered that England 'had become the richest country in the world' and 

that Continental visitors such as Hippolyte Taine had observed that there were 'visible signs 

of prosperity and opulence everywhere'.430 Thus, it would appear that the spoils of 

commerce and industry, most of which had evolved on the middle class entrepreneur, had 

been applied to an unprecedented consumption of material goods. Such consumption 

served the dual purpose of providing evidence of the financial resources of the successful, 

4 2 6 Macleod in Art and the Victorian Middle Class (1996) discusses this issue in Chapter 4, "Money and 
mainstream mid-Victorian values", as does Hoppen in The Mid-Victorian Generation (1998) in Chapter 11, 
"The Business of Culture". 

4 2 7 Macleod, Art and the Victorian Middle Class (1996). 
Although they were not necessarily owners of country houses, these investors indicated that a significant 
proportion of the middle class was investing in cultural artefacts. 
428 The Times, "Death of Mr Walter", November 5, 1894. 
See Appendix A ; insurance valuations of artworks at Bear Wood. 
429 The Times, "Death of Mr Walter", Monday, November 5, 1894. 
4 3 0 Macleod, Art and the Victorian Middle Class (1996): 209. 



137 

middle class entrepreneurial investors, as well as indications of their cultural intellect and 

aesthetic tastes.431 

One such collector was John Walter of Bear Wood. It was noted of Walter that he 

had 'artistic tastes that were not less strongly developed than his aptitudes for business and 

public affairs', that he was a 'fine judge of pictures, a judicious buyer, and a regular visitor 

to the exhibitions and principal sales'.432 However, any inferences of conspicuous 

consumption on the part of Walter would have countered middle class images of restraint 

and propriety by which he, as a representative of middle class ideals, would wish to be 

identified. Hence, it might be presumed that any public evidence of cultural acquisitions by 

middle class investors and collectors, such as Walter, needed to be mitigated by some sort 

of moral rationale. Perhaps is was that any public indications of expenditures on the 

acquisition of cultural artefacts could be aligned with philanthropic leanings that combined 

civic pride with an apparent sense of civic responsibility. This hypothesis can be supported, 

for example, by the construction of civic buildings, particularly town halls, that provided 

evidence of both middle class commercial success, together with its now-established 

responsibilities for the administration of civic affairs.433 Both the increasing wealth and the 

political involvement of the middle class resulted in, as historian, Theodore Hoppen notes, 

'municipal bodies [that] vied with one another to build impressive town halls...to symbolize 

the opulence of the city and the great principle of self-government'.434 Such middle class 

4 3 1 Authors such as Briggs, Davidoff and Hall, Girouard and Thompson, for example, all address the issue 
of 19th. century middle class consumption. Macleod deals specifically with expenditure on art. 
4 3 2 The Times, "Death of Mr Walter", November 5, 1894. 
4 3 3 Enfranchisement of male householders had led to the apparent democratic election of candidates for 
government at the expense of the tradition of the aristocracy 'governing by right'. 
4 3 4 Hoppen, The Mid-Victorian Generation (1998): 421. Hoppen cites such as Birmingham (1832) Leeds 
(1853) Liverpool (1860) and Manchester (1866) as some leading examples. The prosperity of all such cities 
was founded on industrialization and the entrepreneurial success of the middle class. 



138 

ideals of civic pride and duty extended to providing other institutions, like museums, art 

galleries and churches, ostensibly for the cultural erudition or the salvation of the public at 

large.435 Such architectural forms, whether civic or otherwise, were designed to express an 

identity for a middle class that 'reflected' as the historian, Richard Altick notes, 'the 

appearance of a novel concept in social thinking'.436 By the mid-nineteenth century, the 

meaning of culture for the middle class had 'come to mean a whole way of life, material, 

intellectual and spiritual'.437 To the middle class financier, this meant 'not only an 

individual ideal but a social one as well...an expression... of man's need for institutions which 

should confirm and constitute Ms personal efforts'.438 

In the case of John Walter, indications of both a civic responsibility and an 

. opportunity to display his cultural acquisitions were apparent in that he lent 'the best' of his 

pictures, 'some of them more than once', to the winter exhibitions at the Royal 

Academy'.439 Further evidence that he combined gestures of philanthropy and civic 

responsibility with his aesthetic tastes can be identified in the 'highly inventive' Gothic 

revival details incorporated into St. Paul's church, Wokingham, the building he endowed in 

4 3 5 Kerr, in fact, had submitted designs in 1864 for the proposed Museum of Natural History at South 
Kensington. Biographical notes on Kerr, Dictionary of National of National Biography: 24. Ruskin, along 
with Dr Henry Acland, 'instigator and promoter of the museum', had been influential in the construction of 
the Oxford University Museum, completed in 1860. It is noted of Acland that his 'lifelong desire to do good 
to his fellow men was firmly implanted...by his severely Evangelical upbringing'. Oxford University 
Museum (1991): 4. 
4 3 6 Altick, Victorian People and Ideas (1973): 238. 
4 3 7 Ibid. 
4 3 8 Ibid.: 239. Altick quotes historian, Raymond Williams. 
439 The Times, "Death of Mr. Walter" , November 5, 1894. 
Hoppen notes that the Royal Academy 'reigned supreme' with its exhibitions. In 1879, 'attendance was not 
less than 391,197'. The Mid-Victorian Generation (1998): 415. 
In order that they might be seen by the working classes, many museums, galleries and exhibitions stayed 
open late on specific evenings and either offered free admission or charged a reduced fee. The latter 
precedent had been set with the Great Exhibition in 1861. 
That Walter was also a Member of Parliament might also be perceived as evidence of a sense of his civic 
responsibility. 



139 

1864.440 It would appear that, for John Walter as well as for other wealthy middle class 

collectors of cultural artefacts, any public exhibition that proclaimed either their 

individualistic cultural acumen or financial expenditures could be mitigated by philanthropic 

gestures. For many, such gestures included donations or bequests of their collections to 

public art galleries or museums.441 For these collectors, a moral rationale that embraced 

any gestures of a social conscience expressed in philanthropic deeds, or as civic 

responsibility and pride would have mitigated any public display of the accumulation of 

material goods. In addition, philanthropic gestures of civic responsibility and generosity 

could not but help invest them with social recognition and an identity that set them apart 

from the self-indulgent habits and extravagant display traditionally associated with the 

aristocracy. 

Although, with some noted exceptions, little architectural consideration was given 

for the specific display of artworks in the nineteenth century country houses of middle class 

owners, it is evident that cultural acquisitions did form part of the interior decor. Thus, it 

might be presumed that such acquisitions were intended to underscore values by which the 

class wished to be identified, even within the confines of a private, domestic family life. For 

example, inferences of intellect coupled with refinement would have been conveyed by the 

display of books. As Stevenson noted, these should be on a 'round table, without which no 

ladies' drawing room is considered to be complete'.442 In addition, Stevenson suggested 

4 4 0 Dictionary of National Biography, "Walter, John" : 715 notes that 'Walter had a strong native 
inclination for building', so it might be presumed that his tastes and values influenced the architectural 
design for the church, as well as for Bear Wood house. 
4 4 1 Although there is no evidence that Walter made any such bequests, Macleod in Art and the Victorian 
Middle Class (1996) includes an appendix of 'major Victorian collectors', many of whom gave all or part of 
their collections to public institutions. 
4 4 2 Stevenson, House Architecture, Vol. 7/(1880): 59. 



140 

there be cabinets for curiosities, that statuary be in groups, there be stands for folios of 

engravings and bookcases for works of art, all of which would have inferred a diversity of 

cultural tastes.443 Combined with the fact that all the house plans surveyed in Franklin's 

The Gentleman's Country House made provision for library space, such suggestions 

indicate that the middle class owners not only wished to be considered culturally erudite, 

but that they had the leisure time in which to follow such refined pursuits. This may have 

been considered particularly relevant for women, for whom leisure was considered a badge 

of middle class status.444 As Ruskin advocated, it benefited the female to 'turn her loose 

into the... library' so that she might form ' character, moral and intellectual'.445 

That middle class cultural tastes reflected the values to which its members 

subscribed and by which they apparently wished to be identified are referenced by the 

sentimental, domestic narratives, or by the genre studies or moral themes represented in the 

cultural artefacts they endorsed. Referencing the 'iconic popularity' of such tastes, Altick 

states that: 

the criteria of acceptable art are usually summed up in the term 
"moral aesthetic".. .the... emphasis.. .was upon theme rather than 
expression, upon intention and substance rather than technique. 
The more pleasing a style was, the better; but style should never 
be so conspicuous as to distract attention from content.446 

Such nineteenth century middle class standards were indicated, for instance, by the owner of 

Brodsworth who purchased artworks that revealed his 'taste for contemporary sculpture, 

4 4 3 Ibid. 
4 4 4 Perkin in Victorian Women (1993) addresses the issue of education for women in Chapter 2. 
4 4 5 Ruskin, Sesame and Lilies (1887): 153 & 157. In these passages, Ruskin advised on the education of 
the female. 
4 4 6 Altick, Victorian People and Ideas (1973): 272. 



141 

with its often sentimental subject matter'.447 Images that referenced the sentimental, along 

with genre images of domestic felicity, religious and moral propriety, as well as overtones of 

nationalistic fervour, were topics in demand, to be accommodated by a myriad of themes 

that ranged from the family group at festive occasions, to family pets, from idyllic pastoral 

scenes, to the retributions accorded those who strayed outside the boundaries of behaviour 

befitting middle class standards.448 

The way in which the majority of middle class owners chose to display their cultural 

tastes in the domestic sphere adds further credence to the suggestion that their cultural 

artefacts were considered a means by which class values could be emphasized. Not for 

them the extensive enfilade of public rooms found in earlier country houses with their 

extravagant, ebullient and exorbitant display of classical taste with its associative 

intemperate connotations of being the prerogative of the aristocracy.449 Not for them 

eighteenth century references to foreign, un-English tastes.450 Instead, for the nineteenth 

century middle class owner of a country house, the matrix of domestic space afforded an 

4 4 7 English Heritage, Brodsworth Hall (1995): 13 refers to Thellusson's 'taste for contemporary sculpture, 
with its often sentimental subject matter and concentration on intricate details'. Artists such as Sir Edwin 
Landseer (1802-1873) produced sentimental images of family pets. Samuel Palmer (1805-1881) and 
Edward John Pointer (1836-1919) painted subjects that ranged from the pastoral to the nationalistic. The 
Pre-Raphaelite artists, such as Sir John Everett Millais (1829-1896) and Lord Frederic Leighton (1830-
1895) represented moral and religious propriety, as well as idealized images of the family unit or the female 
figure among their works. 
4 4 8 Although they might appear to counter any notions of nationalism, the Dutch paintings belonging to the 
owners of Brodsworth and Bear Wood are notable in that they represented connotations domesticity. 
The influences of middle class propriety extended to the aristocracy. The 7th! Duke of Marlborough 
removed, among others, nine paintings by Titian, 'The Loves of the Gods', from the hall at Blenheim. In 
the 1820s and still on public view in the hall, the paintings had been admired by Hazlitt who 'waxed 
ecstatic on their 'purple light of love, crimsoned blushes, looks bathed in rapture, kisses with immortal 
sweetness". In 1861, when subsequently hidden in a room above the steward's office, bake house and store, 
they were destroyed by fire. Fowler, Blenheim (1989): 157. 
4 4 9 The desire for impressive display had long been established by the aristocracy. At 17th. century 
Chatsworth, for example, a large mirror, in line with the communicating doors and of the same proportions, 
was placed at the far south end of the state rooms so as to double the apparent length of the enfdade. 
450 In The Mid-Victorian Generation, "The Business ofCulture" (1998) Hoppen discusses the popularity 
of practicing British artists, the impressive amounts of money spent on their work and the resultant wealth 
of the artists. 



142 

impression of privacy, comfort and a sober sagacity. Integrated into this space were the 

cultural artefacts that represented the ethos of a family, serious and responsible 

representatives of a social class that considered itself to be the backbone of the progressive 

and modern English nation. 

Factored into this, however, must be middle class ambitions to establish an identity 

for itself in the social order, an identity that not only reflected status concomitant with 

wealth, but an identity underscored by evidence of aesthetic interests and cultural tastes. 

The suggestion that the middle class saw its accumulation of cultural artefacts as a means by 

which to establish an identity is supported by Dianne Macleod, who posits that these middle 

class investors were 'driven by a need to ascertain social status' and that their resultant 

collections of artworks 'established a social provenance' for them.451 As Macleod also 

suggests, the entrepreneurial success of such investors 'caused them to turn to art as a 

means of carving out an identity of their own that was distinct...' 4 5 2 

However, in line with middle class tenets based on privacy and domestic felicity, the 

spatial organization of the interior of nineteenth century country houses was not regarded as 

a medium by which any distinctive identity of class could be publicly impressed on the social 

order. As has been noted, however, this was countered in that the middle class, by 

supporting such as public institutions and exhibitions, established a way in which it could 

advertise its cultural tastes in the public forum. That this may have been interpreted as an 

indication of an unrestrained or opulent consumption of material goods was mitigated when 

presented under a rubric of philanthropic concerns that underscored a sense of civic duty 

451 
452 

Macleod, Art and the Victorian Middle Class (1996): 210 & 249. 
Ibid.: Introductory statement. 



143 

and responsibility. In this way, the tenets to which the middle class subscribed could be 

sustained and an appropriate identity established. 



144 

CONCLUSION 

That an unprecedented number of the mid-nineteenth century wealthy middle class 

made a considerable financial investment in the ownership of a country estate and house 

indicates that they had specific reasons for so doing. In examining their motivations, the 

generally tacit assumption that the ambition of the nineteenth century middle class investor 

was to join the ranks of the established landed aristocracy has here been questioned. 

Instead, evidence suggests that credence be given to the hypothesis that the country house 

was considered an architectural medium by which a wealthy middle class owner could 

achieve the objective of constructing, establishing and, ultimately, legitimating the identity 

of his class as being separate and apart from that of the other social classes. 

The intention with this thesis has been to give a meaningful interpretation to the 

architectural significance of a nineteenth century country house. An analysis of the 

exemplar, Bear Wood country house and estate, has indicated that the way in which the 

nineteenth century middle class presented itself can be identified by means of the approach 

to the country house, the style of architecture employed in its construction and the spatial 

organization of its interior. Whilst it is acknowledged that the owner and architect of Bear 

Wood cannot be considered prototypical representatives of a far from homogenous middle 

class, it has been suggested that both embodied many of the tenets to which that class 

commonly subscribed. That so many of these values could be so fully played out in a 

country house such as Bear Wood was due to the considerable financial resources available 

to John Walter, so providing a particularly clear example from which the arguments and 

conclusions in this thesis could be presented. 



145 

This work has reflected the axiom that, despite gradations of wealth and subsequent 

levels of rank, the unity of the nineteenth century middle class lay in its common adherence 

to certain attitudes and values by which it wished to be perceived and identified. However, 

it has also been posited that there was a diversity in the way in which those claiming middle 

class status appeared to present themselves. A study of Bear Wood provides an indication 

that middle class tenets could be expressed in ways that ranged from a strident and acicular 

announcement of entrepreneurial acumen and success, to a more succinct and subtle 

representation of domestic values and standards of propriety. Perhaps this diversity of 

representation was best summed up by Kerr himself who, in his 'considerations' for a 

English gentleman's house, provided his reader with sufficiently ambivalent architectural 

advice, so to allow middle class owners to juxtapose the seemingly contradictory images by 

which they appeared to be identified.453 

It is acknowledged that Robert Kerr, as author of the book on which much of this 

study has been based, was by no means a prolific builder of country houses, as were many 

of his architectural peers.454 However, his influence on contemporary domestic architecture 

and interior design was acknowledged by contemporaries, particularly after the 1865 

publication of his definitive work, The Gentleman's House. Considered by The Builder to 

have been 'worked out in a manner that may be called nearly exhaustive of principles and of 

detail for purposes Of information and reference', Kerr's book can also be regarded as his 

codification of the diversity of attitudes shared by both his professional peers and the middle 

4 5 3 Kerr, The Gentleman's House (1865): 90. 
4 5 4 In addition to Bear Wood, two more country houses are attributed to Kerr. Ford Manor, Lingfield, 
Surrey was built in 1868 for Mr. Spender-Clay. Also commissioned after Bear Wood was nearby Ascot 
Heath House, Berkshire for John Walter's editor of The Times, M r Delane. 
Kerr's work, previous to these country houses, had been in designing commercial buildings, such as the 
1863 National Provident Institution, Gracechurch Street, London. 



146 

class readers to whom, it has been assumed, the book was primarily addressed.455 This 

assumption is affirmed by the review in The Builder of Kerr's book, wherein it was noted 

that the work 'certainly assists the comprehension of the ordinary reader and the 

professional student'.456 That it should influence John Walter to the extent that he would 

commission Kerr to design Bear Wood was remarked upon in the June 6, 1868 edition of 

the same publication. As both a practicing Professor of Architecture and an actively 

involved member of newly emerging professional associations, it would appear that Robert 

Kerr was in a position to both influence his audience, as well as to confer some professional 

credence to his theoretical maxims.457 To some extent, Kerr's influence was to be 

recognized by his contemporary peers. He was, for example, acknowledged by E.W. 

Godwin in the July 5, 1872 edition of the Building News for, besides his 'loquaciousness' 

for which he was recognized, his eloquence, both written and orated, appeared to keep his 

name consistently prominent and at the forefront of contemporary architectural 

discipline.458 

Despite their influence, neither owner nor architect of Bear Wood should be 

considered prototypical. This assumption is based on the understanding that degrees of 

wealth and the subsequent diverse economic and social backgrounds of those who claimed 

middle class status contributed to an equally diverse range of tastes and the way in which 

they were displayed. However, as a wealthy member of the middle class and proprietor of 

455 The Builder, "The Gentleman's House", January 7, 1865: 2. 
4 5 6 Ibid: 3. 
4 5 7 For instance, Kerr remained active in RIBA. On February 19, 1875, The Building News recorded that 
Professor Kerr had 'made a few remarks' at an ordinary general meeting. On May 28, 1875, The Building 
News again recorded Kerr as having been in attendance at another ordinary general meeting at RIBA. 
The Directory of British Architects lists Kerr as an 'influential author'. 

4 5 8 'We mention him, not because of his works, but because his loquaciousness makes him prominent'. 
Quoted by Girouard in The Victorian Country House (1971): 121 from an article by Godwin, "Modern 
Architects and their Work": The Builder, July 5, 1872. 



147 

an influential newspaper, John Walter was in a position to demonstrate many of the social 

attitudes and values to which he would have subscribed. To this must be added the 

authority inherent in his role as owner of an estate and country house. It is likely that, as a 

successful nineteenth century middle class entrepreneur, Walter would have identified 

himself with the opinion expressed in The Builder that Kerr's book was 'eminently designed 

for those who will read thinkingly, - that class of progressionists, always ready to be 

searchers...'459 At the same time, however, it must be acknowledged that much attributed 

to the private life of John Walter in this thesis has been speculative rather than substantiated, 

primarily because any papers on him, outside of what was published in The Times, do not 

appear to be lodged in public archives.460 Information published in The Times, because of 

its source, should be considered with caution. 

This thesis has suggested that, with the initial approach to the main gate of Bear 

Wood, the presence, the prestige and the wealth of the owner of the estate were indicated in 

a very public way. Juxtaposed to this public proclamation of status, the existence of an 

estate village such as Sindlesham Green, prominently clustered along the approach to the 

main gate, was a means by which the owner could also advertise his philanthropic concerns. 

The lodge, with its modest size and vernacular architecture, as well as the truncated length 

of the driveway, were, unlike the approach to country houses in previous centuries, 

intended to both underplay any expectations of architectural grandeur, as well as to shelter 

the privacy of the inhabitants. Such an approach inferred notions of a nineteenth century 

middle class subscription to privacy and discretion, in contrast to the intentions behind the 

4 5 9 Ibid: 2-3. 
4 6 0 Girouard in his articles in Country Life, "Bear Wood, Berkshire " Parts I & II, October 17 & 24, 1968, 
acknowledges access to family papers in the possession of Mrs. John Walter IV of Hove, Sussex. This 
appears to be the last reference made to such papers and I was not able to access them. 



148 

grandiose and orchestrated approach to many earlier country houses. However, at Bear 

Wood, nineteenth century notions of privacy and discretion were challenged by the impact 

made by the sudden and impressive revelation of the entrance facade. This apparent 

contradiction serves to reaffirm the diversity with which the identity of a middle class 

owner, like John Walter, was presented. 

A study of the theoretical attention given by Kerr to the spatial organization of the 

domestic interior has provided a significant resource from which to identify that many of the 

proprieties that formed the basis of nineteenth century middle class identity were both 

implemented in and sustained by, architectural planriing. In addition, the spatial 

organization of the domestic interior of country houses built in the middle years of the 

nineteenth century was specifically intended as a means by which the quotidian existence of 

its inhabitants could be ordered within the parameters of middle class values. This, perhaps, 

was little different from the objectives behind the spatial organization of previous country 

houses in that the inhabitants of these earlier houses were also intended to function within 

the tenets by which the owners operated. However, the focus of these objectives differed. 

In the previous century in particular, the ambition of owner and architect was primarily to 

display the wealth, status and standing of the owner within the ufnits of a strictly defined 

architectural taste. In that social order, the landed gentry were well established and 

comfortably confident in an identity that was concomitant with the social class to which 

they belonged. Hence, the intention with both architecture and spatial organization was that 

the elite and erudite cultural tastes of the owner be dramatically and spectacularly displayed 

and available for public viewing. 



1 4 9 

In contrast, the objective of the builders of nineteenth century country houses 

belonging to the middle class was that the architectural style and the interior design, 

although also intended to display wealth, status and standing, accommodate many of the 

values of everyday life on which the class based its identity. Unlike earlier country houses, 

wherein the focus was on a strict adherence to what were considered the rules of 

architecture, at Bear Wood there was a deliberate indication of function through the 

architectural form. This often indicated distinct hierarchical differences between the 

inhabitants. 

In addition, there was the subscription to middle class notions of domestic felicity 

and the family unit, which entailed concerns for privacy, coupled with moral, social and 

religious restraints. There was an adherence to what was perceived to be civic and 

philanthropic duties that operated under the rubrics of responsibility, efficiency, 

progressiveness and concerns for salubrity. Added to this, the eclectic and individual 

cultural predilections and tastes of owner and architect, when expressed in architectural 

form, were a further means by which they, as representatives of the middle class, could 

present the values to which they subscribed. All of these factors contributed to an identity 

intended to be understood as separate and apart from that traditionally associated with the 

earlier landowning aristocracy. 

That issue of architectural eclecticism was a prominent one in nineteenth century 

England. When reading a paper to the members of the Royal Institute of British Architects, 

the architect J.J. Stevenson, remarked that 'the individual is now everything in architecture' 

and that the 'new system subjects the art to the caprices and vagaries of the individual'.461 

The Building News, January 8, 1875. 



150 

This was evident with the general acceptance of Eclecticism as an architectural style that 

might best represent the era. It can be said of a country house owner like John Walter, 

wealthy and an acknowledged arbiter of contemporary cultural tastes, that he advertised his 

confidence in his position and his influence with the incorporation of a range of architectural 

styles into the design of the house he commissioned. 

It has been widely affirmed that members of the Victorian middle class did see 

themselves as the linchpin located at the very centre of the social order, as missionaries with 

a self-imposed mandate to establish and maintain the tenets by which they were to be 

identified. In order to underwrite the credibility of middle class values, it was important that 

every appearance of stability within their class structure be apparent. Characteristics such 

as solidarity, authority and dignity were transmogrified into architectural form to be 

supported by the spatial plan of the domestic interior. The latter, with its emphasis on the 

separation of the public from the private spheres, as well as on the insularity of the family 

unit, allowed the deployment of middle class standards of morality and propriety within the 

home. 

In the domestic interior of a house like Bear Wood, it has been identified that middle 

class ideologies of morality and propriety could be sustained by the binary division of the 

inhabitants, segregated by both gender and status. Also identified as having been 

incorporated into the spatial organization of Bear Wood were contemporary middle class 

attitudes that ranged from comfort to convenience, from concerns for efficiency, to issues of 

hygiene and sanitation. All were addressed in Kerr's theoretical maxims and expressed in 

architectural terms in Bear Wood, particularly with the specific attention given to the design 

for the domestic interior in that it should first accommodate and then sustain, these values. 



151 

The ways in which women, children arid servants, in particular, contributed to the 

construction and the implementation of the image that represented the nineteenth century 

middle class domestic ideal were significant. They were expected to conform to a routine 

that, it would appear from Bear Wood, was accommodated by a spatial organization that 

put in place behavioural mechanisms that firmly controlled their interaction within the 

domestic sphere and, thus, were intended to maintain middle class values. 

The fact that so many of the wealthier middle class invested in a country estate and 

house has lent credence to the assumption that the driving ambition of the nineteenth 

century middle class owner was to integrate into the ranks of the established landed gentry. 

Many literary and documented sources endorse the idea that there had traditionally been a 

certain degree of inter-class mobility. This appears to have accelerated in the nineteenth 

century in tandem with the rapidly increasing numbers of an influential and wealthy middle 

class, along with the simultaneous decline in the traditional autonomous authority of the 

aristocracy. There is no doubt that members of the Victorian nouveau-riche did marry, or 

were promoted, into the ranks of the nobility.462 However, less obvious, or at least less 

considered, has been the focus of this study, which suggests that this was by no means the 

primary objective behind the unprecedented construction of country houses by the wealthy 

middle class. Rather, here it has been suggested that the middle class owner used inherent 

precepts associated with the stewardship of an estate and country house to his advantage. 

In order to firmly establish the identity of his class in the context of the contemporary social 

order, he employed the status, prestige and power that were traditionally associated with 

the ownership of a country estate to express his middle class values, so to legitimate and 

4 6 2 Franklin, The Gentleman's Country House (1981): 24. In the latter years of the 19th. century, as Lady 
Stanley of Alderley once put it, 'half the peerage have no grandfathers". 



152 

affirm the position of his class in the nineteenth century English social order. As has been 

identified at Bear Wood, the medium of architecture was a means by which he could do 

this. 



153 

S E L E C T E D B I B L I O G R A P H Y 

Adams, Annemarie. Architecture in the Family Way. 
Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press, 1996 

Altick, Richard D. Victorian People & Ideas. 
New York: W.W. Norton & Co. Inc., 1973 

Aslet, Clive. The Last Country Houses. 
New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1982 

Attfield, Judy & Kirkham, Pat, eds. A View from the Interior. Ferninism. Women 
& Design. 

London: The Women's Press Limited, 1989 

Barrell, John. The Dark Side of the Landscape. The Rural Poor in English Painting 
1730-1840. 

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980 

Beard, Geoffrey. The English House Interior. 
London: Viking, 1990 

Beckett, J.V. The Aristocracy in England 1660 - 1914. 
Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd., 1986 

Best, Geoffrey. Mid -Victorian Britain 1851 - 1875. 
London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1971 

Betjeman, John and Piper, John, eds. Murray's Berkshire Architectural Guide. 
London: John Murray, 1949 

Black, Eugene C , ed. Victorian Culture and Society. 
New York: Walker and Company, 1974 

Briggs, Asa. Victorian Things. 
London: B.T. Batsford Ltd., 1988 

Burnett, John, ed. Useful Toil. Autobiographies of Working People from the 
1820s to the 1920s. 

London: Allen Lane, 1974 

Cannadine, David. Aspects of Aristocracy. 
New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 1994 



154 

Cannadine, David. The Decline and Fall of the British Aristocracy. 
New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 1990 

Cate, George Allan. The Correspondence of Thomas Carlyle & John Ruskin. 
Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1982 

Collins, Peter. Changing Ideals in Modern Architecture 1750-1950. 
London: Faber & Faber, 1965 

Creese, Walter. The Search for Environment. The Garden City. Before & After. 
New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 1966 

Crook, J. Morduant. The Dilemma of Style. Architectural Ideas from the 
Picturesque to the Post-Modern. 

Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1987 

Darley, Gillian. Villages of Vision. 
London: The Architectural Press Ltd., 1975 

Davidoff, Leonore. The Best Circles. Society. Etiquette & the Season. 
London: CroomeHelm, 1973 

Davidoff, Leonore & Hall, Catherine. Family Fortunes. 
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1987 

Davidoff, Leonore & Westover, Belinda, eds. Our Work, Our Lives. Our Words. 
London: MacMillan Education Ltd., 1986 

Davidson, Caroline. A Woman's Work is Never Done. A History of Housework 
in the British Isles 1650-1950. 

London: Chatto & Windus, 1982 

Dutton, Ralph. The Victorian Home. Some Aspects of Nineteenth-Century Taste and 
Manners. 

London: B.T.Batssford Ltd., 1954 

Eagleton, Terry. Ideology: An Introduction. 
London & New York: Verso, 1991 

Easthope, Antony & McGowan, Kate, eds. A Critical and Cultural Theory Reader. 
Toronto & Buffalo: University of Toronto Press, 1992 

Edwardes, Charles, et al. Historic Houses of the United Kingdom. 
London: Cassell and Company Limited, 1892. 



155 

Elton, Arthur et al. Researching the Country House. 
London: B.T. Batsford Ltd., 1992 

Engels, Frederick. The Condition of the Working Class in England 1844 
(With Preface Written in 1892). 

London: Allen &Unwin, 1920 

Evans, Robin. Translations from Drawing to Building. 
Cambridge, Mass: M.I.T. Press, 1997 

Fabricant, Carole. "The Aesthetics and Politics of Landscape in the 
Eighteenth Century": Studies in 18th. Century British Art & Aesthetics. 

University of California Press, 1985 

Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality. 
New York: Vintage Books, 1990 

Fowler, Marian. Blenheim. Biography of a Palace. 
London: Viking, 1989 

Franklin, Jill. The Gentleman's Country House and Its Plan. 
London: Kegan Paul Ltd., 1981 

Fraser, Flora. The English Gentlewoman. 
London: Barrie & Jenkins, 1987 

Garrigan, Kristine Ottesen. Ruskin on Architecture. His Thought and Influence. 
Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1973 

Garrigan, Kristine Ottesen, ed. Victorian Scandals. Representations of Gender 
and Class. 

Athens: Ohio University Press, 1992 

Gauldie, Enid. Cruel Habitations. 
London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1974. 

Gerard, Jessica A. Country House Life. Family & Servants, 1815-1914. 
Oxford, U K & Cambridge USA: Blackwell, 1994 

Gerard, Jessica A. "Invisible Servants: the Country House and the Local Community." 
Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research (vol. LVTI #136: Nov. 1984) 
178-188 

Girouard, Mark. A Country House Companion. 
Leicester: Magna Books, 1987 



156 

Girouard, Mark. "Bear Wood, Berkshire". Parts I & II 
Country Life (vol. 144, October 17, 1986) 964-967 
(vol. 145, October 24, 1968) 1060-1063. 

Girouard, Mark. Life in the English Country House. A Social and Architectural 
History. 

New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1978 

Girouard, Mark. The Victorian Country House. 
New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971 & 1979 

Grisewood, Harman, et al. Ideas and Beliefs of the Victorians. An Historic 
Revaluation of the Victorian Age. 

London: Sylvan Press Limited, 1949 

Groenewegen, Peter, ed. Feminism and Political Economy in Victorian England. 
Aldershot: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 1994 

Hall, Catherine, White. Male and Middle-Class: Explorations in Feminism in History. 
Cambridge: Polity Press, 1992 

Hardyment, Christina. From Mangle to Microwave. The Mechanization of 
Household Work. 

Cambridge: Polity Press, 1988 

Hardyment, Christina. Home Comfort. A History of Domestic Arrangements. 
London: Viking, 1992 

Harris, John. The Architect and the British Country House 1620-1920. 
Washington: The ALA Press, 1985 

Harrison, J.F.C. Early Victorian Britain. 1832-51. 
London: Fontana Press, 1979 

Hartcup, Adeline. Love & Marriage in the Great Country Houses. 
London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1984 

Hayden, Dolores. The Grand Domestic Revolution. 
Cambridge, Massachusettes: The MIT Press, 1981 

Hecht, J. Jean. The Domestic Servant in Eighteenth-Century England. 
London, Boston and Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1980 

Hill, Bridget. English Domestics in the Eighteenth Century. 
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996 



157 

Hitchcock, Henry-Russell. Early Victorian Architecture in Britain: 
New Haven: Yale University Press, 1954 

Hobsbawn, E.J. The Age of Capital: 1848-1914. 
New York: Charles Scribner & Sons, 1975 

Hoppen, K. Theodore. The Mid-Victorian Generation: 1846-1886. 
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998 

Horn, Pamela. Ladies of the Manor: Wives & Daughters 
in Country House Society 1830-1918. 

Stroud, Gloucestershire: Allan Sutton, 1991 

Huggett, Frank E. Life Below Stairs. Domestic Servants in England from Victorian 
Times. 

London: John Murray, 1977 

Kerr, Robert. The Gentleman's House. 
London: John Murray, 1865 

Ladd, Henry. The Victorian Morality of Art: an Analysis of 
Ruskin's Esthetic. 

New York: Octagon Books, Inc., 1968 

Langford, Paul. Public Life and the Propertied Englishman 1689-1798. 
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991 

Lea, J. & R . Wokingham: A Pictorial History. 
Chichester: Phillimore & Co., 1990 

Lummis, Trevor. The Labour Aristocracy 1851-1914. 
Aldershot, Hants: Scolar Press, 1994 

Macleod, Dianne Sachko. Art & the Victorian Middle Class. 
Cambridge: University of Cambridge, 1996 

Mandler, Peter. The Rise & Fall of the Stately Home. 
New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 1997 

Markus, Thomas A. Buildings & Power. Freedom and control in the origin of 
Modern Building Types. 

London & New York: Routledge, 1993 

Maroon, Fred J. The English Country House. 
Charlottesville, Virginia: Thomasson-Grant Inc., 1987 



158 

Marshall, Dorothy. Eighteenth Century England. 
London: Longmans, Green and Co. Ltd., 1962 

Mason, Philip. The English Gentleman. The Rise & Fall of an Ideal. 
New York: William Morrow & Company, Inc., 1982 

McKendrick, Neil, Brewer, John and Plumb, J.H. The Birth of a Consumer Society. 
The Commercialization of Eighteenth-century England. 
London: Europa Publications Limited, 1982 

Midwinter, Eric. Victorian Social Reform. 
London: Longmans, Green and Co. Ltd., 1968 

Mills, Dennis R. Lord & Peasant in 19th Century Britain. 
London: CroomHelm, 1980 

Mingay, G.E. A Social History of the English Countryside. 
London & N Y : Routledge, 1990 

Mingay, G.E., ed. The Rural Idyll. 
London: Routledge, 1989 

Mingay, G.E., ed. The Unquiet Countryside. 
London: Routledge, 1989 

Mingay, G. E., ed. The Victorian Countryside. (Vol I & Vol II) 
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1981 

Morgan, Marjorie. Manners, Morals & Class in England. 1774-1858. 
London: The MacMillan Press Ltd., 1994 

Muthesius, Hermann. The English House. 
New York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 1979 

Nevill, Barry St. John, ed. Life at the Court of Queen Victoria 1861-1901. 
Agincourt, Ontario: Methuen, 1984 

Orbach, Julian. Victorian Architecture in Britain. 
London: A & C Black, 1987 

Perkin, Joan. Victorian Women. 
London: John Murray Ltd., 1993 

Pevsner, Nikolaus. The Buildings of England: Berkshire. 
Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books Ltd., 1966 



159 

Pevsner, Nikolaus. Some Architectural Writers of the Nineteenth Century. 
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972. 

Poovey, Mary. Uneven Developments. The Ideological Work of Gender in 
Mid-Victorian England. 

Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988 

PrOchaska, F.K. "Female Philanthropy and Domestic Service in Victorian England." 
Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, (vol. LIV #129, 
May, 1981) 79-85 

Rothschild, Mrs James de. The Rothschilds at Waddesdon Manor. 
London: Collins, 1979. 

Rubinstein, W.D. Men of Property. The Very Wealthy in Britain Since the Industrial 
Revolution. 

London: Croom Helm Ltd., 1981 

Rubinstein, W.D. "The Victorian Middle Class: Wealth, Occupation, and Geography" 
Economic Historic Review (2nd. series, vol. 30, 1977) 602-622 

Rule, John. The Labouring Classes in Early Industrial England 1750-1850. 
London and New York: Longman, 1986 

Ruskin, John. Sesame and Lilies. 
Orpington, Kent: George Allen, 1887 

Ruskin, John. The Queen of the Air. 
Orpington, Kent: George Allen, 1887 

Sambrook, Pamela A. & Brears, Peter., eds. The Country House Kitchen 1650-1900. 
Stroud, Glos.: Alan Sutton Publishing Limited, 1996 

Scott, John. The Upper Classes. Property & Privilege in Britain. 
London: The MacMillan Press Ltd:, 1982 

Shannon, Robert. The Crisis of Imperialism 1865-1915. 
London: Hart-Davis, MacGibbon, 1974 

Sheeran, George. Brass Castles. 
Halifax: Ryburn Publishing Ltd., 1993 

Sigsworth, Eric M . , ed. In Search of Victorian Values. Aspects of Nineteenth-
Century Thought and Society. 

Manchester & N Y : Manchester University Press, 1988 



160 

Spring, David. The English Landed Estate in the Nineteenth Century. 
Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 1963 

Stevenson, J.J. House Architecture: Vols. I & II. 
London: MacMillan and Co., 1880 

Stewart, Robert. Party & Politics 1830-1852. 
New York: St. Martin's Press, 1989 

Sykes, Christopher Simon. Black Sheep 
London: Chatto &Windus, 1982 

Thompson, F.M.L. English Landed Society in the Nineteenth Century. 
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1963 

Thompson, F.M.L. The Rise of Respectable Society. 
A Social History of Victorian Britain 1830-1900. 

London: Fontana Press, 1988 

Walton, John. Late Georgian and Victorian Britain. 
London: George Philip Limited, 1989 

Walvin, James. Leisure & Society 1830-1950. 
London & New York: Longman, 1978 

Waterson, Merlin, ed. The Country House Remembered. 
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985 

Williams, Raymond. Culture and Society 1780-1950. 
New York: Columbia University Press, 1960 

Wilson, Adrian, ed. Rethinking Social History. English Society 1570-1920 
& Its Interpretation. 

Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1993 

Yarwood, Doreen. Five Hundred Years of Technology in the Home. 
London: B.T. Batsford Ltd., 1983 



161 

R E S O U R C E M A T E R I A L 

BERKSHIRE COUNTY RECORD OFFICE 
Material relating to Bear Wood Estate, Sindlesham, Berks. 

CASTLE HOWARD ESTATE LTD. 
Castle Howard 

DERBYSHIRE COUNTRYSIDE LTD. 
Chatsworth 

DICTIONARY OF NATIONAL BIOGRAPHY 
John Walter n i 

DIRECTORY OF BRITISH ARCHITECTS 1834-1900 
Biographical data on Robert Kerr 

ENGLISH HERITAGE 
Brodsworth Hall 

HAREWOOD HOUSE TRUST LTD. 
Harewood House 

HISTORIC HOUSES ASSOCIATION 

N E W B Y H A L L ESTATE 
Newby Hall 

NEWS INTERNATIONAL pic 
Archives for the Times 
"John Walter II Biographical Data" 

OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 
Oxford University Museum 

R O Y A L INSTITUTE OF BRITISH ARCHITECTS 

SEELEY, WELLS 
Holkham Hall 

THE BRITISH ARCHITECTURAL L I B R A R Y 
Duffy, Dr. Francis, President of the RIB A. "The Royal Institute of British 
Architects". 1995 



162 

THE BUILDER 
1865, 1868, 1869, 1904 

THE BUILDING NEWS 
1874, 1875, 1904 

THE NATIONAL TRUST 
Basildon Park 
Cragside 
Kedleston Hall 
Petworth House: The Servants' Quarters 
Wallington 

The Times NEWSPAPER 
"Death of Mr. Walter" July 29, 1847 
"Death of Mr. Walter" November 5, 1894 
"John Walter E, 1776-1847" July 23, 1947 

THE Universal Daily Register NEWSPAPER 
First Edition (later The Times Newspaper) 

"To the Public" January 1, 1785 



163 

APPENDIX A 

The Formation & Dispersal of a Great Nineteenth Century Landed Estate 
Source: Berkshire County Record Office 

A Statement of Account Showing Sales & Purchases by John Walter Esq. for the last 
30 years. 
Copy sent to Mr. Walter, 29 May, 1886 
(DE WLE38 R O . ) 

Purchases: July 1840 - 1885 
addendum September, 1888 
5371,765.10.00 

Sales: £126,500.10.00 

Title Deeds Relating to Estates in the Several Parishes of Hurst, Arborfield, 
Wokingham in the County of Berkshire Comprised in the Settlement made on the 
Marriage of John Walter, Junior Esq. with Miss Emily Frances Court (d. 1858) & 
Dated the 26th. Day of September, 1842. 
(D/EW1 E l R O . ) 
The 73 page Title Deeds Outline the Property Deeded Under the Will of John Walter, 
Senior. 

1903 Schedule of Deeds of Property & Mortgages in the Strong Room at Bear Wood, 
Berks. 

Listing: Wokingham Yateley 
Finchhamstead Barkham 
Hurst Sandhurst 
& Miscellaneous Deeds 

January 18, 1884 Catalogue of Pictures at Bear Wood to be Insured by the Sun 
Insurance Co. Sun Fire Office, Threadneedle Street, E C : Policy 323176. 
Annual Premium payable at Christmas: £59.2s.6d 

Picture Gallery 524,475.00 
Drawing Room 400.00 
Dining Room 1,400.00 
Pictures Valued at: £26.275.00 

January 10, 1896 Fine Art & General Insurance Co. Ltd. 90 Cannon Street, E C : 
Pictures Valued at: £22.670.00 

(DEWLF12/13R.O.) 
Sale Plan of the Bear Wood Estate 1912 

Lot 1 House, Lake & Surrounding Woods 
Lot 2 Sindlesham Home Farm 
Lot 3 Bear Wood Farm & Lummier Hill 

for Sale by Private Treaty by Messrs. Knight, Frank & Rutley in conjunction with 
Messrs. Trollope 
(D/EWAL E14 R.O.) 



164 

APPENDIX B 

Building accounts & expenditures for the construction of Bear Wood 
Source: Franklin: "The Victorian Country House " 

Pounds Sterling 

Bricks: 4,250,00 6,400.00 
Made on the estate 

Bricklaying: 17,000.00 

Stone Trim: 17,000.00 
Mansfield trim/York paving 

Cartage: 850.00 

Joinery Work: 40,000.00 

Ironwork: 9,000.00 
Including 4,000,00 on rolled joists 

Plumbing & Leadwork: 4,600 00 

Stoves & Heating Apparatus: 6,000 00 

Painting, Glazing, Gilding: 7,000 00 

Plastering: 7,000.00 

Wages: (totalling approx. 50% of cost of construction) 
Skilled Men 2.12s.6d per week 
Unskilled Labourers 10s. per week 

Architect's Commission: 5% of cost + travelling expenses 

Architect's Original Estimate: 120,000 00 

Final Cost: >200,000.00 

Annual Income of Owner: 50,000.00